orleans and this guy paul pastore -- >> host: he is the hid incident in the movement because he is not as it's a valuable as paul nellis. he's put kathleen, a democrat, but very much written by bobby jindal, the current republican, and he is the one driving reform in the state of louisiana. >> guest: we are talking about bipartisanship. this is what can happen. what they understand is there is a ton of charters. there's a ton of accountability. they are not standing for schools that have been operating for a long time where they are not getting education results and they are experimenting with an awful lot but always with measurement, evaluation and accountability. it sounds like a dream today, but what should be happening everywhere. but i think this is part of what arne duncan's plan is national league. ..

>> who i appointed like hillary clinton wife of the governor of arkansas at the time. but they turned out to be two very good people for that job. these are some of the best in national assessments that we have if ever kids are good at math but i think it is crunch time and it is funded again because we now know what it cost us with refocused it -- focus on our fiscal house in an economic recovery it does not have sound educational practice 87 would you think of the reauthorization of elementary and secondary act no child left behind? eighty-one up there are things that i like but i need to see more. they're spending too much

money and the strangling of the opportunities scholarship program was a terrible thing to do it was working for the kids that need it the most but if they are talking about a real evaluation this is what is made and who is angry at them where they say if you evaluate teacher performance you have to look at student performance are the kids learning? that puts accountability where it should be so i am prepared at my risk to take on president obama from time to time. >> host: we talked about competitiveness with china and education and understanding history. let me have use of it up with what worries you and what encourages you about the mission america being competitive with the 21st century the way it was in the 20th? how do we educate the kids and not fall behind like we

seem to be in k-12 education >> guest: what discourages me you have seen of million panels that aspect and i have sat down on of view. when we test our kids in fourth grade with math and science we are top third and eighth grade we're in the middle at 11th grade we are at the bottom. the longer you stay in our system could dumber that you get relative to other kids in the country's. not in this economy. i talk to kids at harvard who is graduating good gpa of losing jobs to kids from other countries tom freedman talks about "the world is flat" and in some ways it is but with competitiveness the terms of the value and this year's dollar value has never been more important. what to encourages me there is some common ground on

education would also encourages me we know what works and makes for a good teaching there's a lot of researching and apart from the family the teacher is the single most important person in the educational process. so now we have a good state of the art of the knowledge maybe we can do the right thing. i have been pushing for 30 years and i will keep pushing. >> host: i am involved bringing teachers and the process in holding them accountable is the most important thing we can do to make sure the 21st century is the same. >> guest: look at these talented kids in teach for america wanting to teach. >> host: if thank you. the book is a center returns. thank you very much.

>> thank you for being here today rehab the great lineup by read the book a couple of times and we should point* out "wingnuts" although i have not launched the international edition it could be called "wingnuts" of the west hollow we talk every week of the wing nuts in this country the book is a terrific read because it explains the emergence of the ring nets and it tells us where we are going with the lunatic fringe of the left and the right begin to hijack the political process.

even the represent a small percentage they have a big megaphone. the one thing i like to do to keep the discussion falling between us and you rather than talk for a block of time and turn the floor open to questions, we will talk for a little bit and then open up some questions then go back to discussion so have the microphone ready and available for that we will give you a heads up. thanks for doing this percodan the book is called "wingnuts" how the lunatic fringe is hijacking america" it is his second book the first was independent nation. we should start off this is a term that has been used from time to time that was coined in the political realm. >> guest: what is say wingnuts? >> ave on the far right or far left on the political

spectrum the unhinged activist, a paranoid conspiracy theory the people who try to decide if one real sign is that. >> host: teeter always confusing partisanship with patriotism that end they change the picture in their hijacking of the politics. >> host: you say the far left and the far right are equally and saying. there is no one has a particular grasp on either side of the fence and at the same time both or eating their own? >> yes i do believe the far right and the far left can be equally in st. and neither party has a claim on virtue or vice. both claim to their outer limits. the power of politics has moved from the center to the

fringes and that has created a destructive dynamic one of the things that happens when parties and more polarized recede the hunt for heretics' as i call it in the republican party it is called rhino hunting. a republican in name only and the democratic party you have still the amateur sport but it is growing in popular name it and die now contain democrats in name only. and it is driving anyone out of the party that does not agree with you 100% of the time. those setter call socially conservative but it has a destructive dynamic for the things we hope to see in our politics and we are supposed to identify and elevate courage but with the wing nuts believe the peugeot

100% of the time that means you are courageous. but is cowardice and conformity but everything is upside down in their world. >> host: you were talking about the idiot of groupthink is how you bring people into this 21 exactly. it is a big problem. it is group polarization one of the primary fights of our time. you can analyze not just american politics the current politics of say struggle between environmentalism and the way that extremist groups recruit is the same dynamic where they talk a radical store a terrorist cell or an extreme political wing. because what they do is to bring like-minded people together in tear people off from the rest of society and they try to incite them and radicalize them by pushing out to anyone who dares disagree.

>> host: that is a serious comparison to say left and right-wing political groups we're the same recruiting dynamic is a terrorist group. >> guest: i went to be clear there is no moral equivalence between 217 in american politics and terrorist. many people in the city week experienced terrorists and personally and we take it personally. but the dynamic we indulge has a some of the same traits an attempt to radicalize people in the attempt to separate them from society and insights them to ever increasing feats of extremism to separate them for the rest of society to say they have special knowledge and the rest of society is corrupt or week and out is the dynamic gold as the hills and usually very destructive. we know the story does not and well. but is the message of the book to confront the extremes of both sides to stop the cycle. >> on that particular point*

buried deep in the book you cite leaders of the extremist groups like to dumb down the rhetoric to where everybody goes believes they are smarter? >> the secret of the demagogue is to make the audience believe that they are as clever as he while simultaneously lowering the bar. economic downturns are boom times for demagogues and that is what we see. of the rise of extreme politics because people are looking for something to blame an outlet for their anxiety. the demagogues says i have a great person to blame, the other. simple solutions to complex problems, watch out and. >> to say it is a perfect political storm to return to pitch for politics 81 we have seen these before.

in the 30's during the depression we had the reverend on the right and you long on the left. we have seen the antecedents for the we experience the late '60s and early 70's people forget the far left activist groups, we traced down and research more than with the housing tallies days cases of shooting some or bombings and then reno were recently the violence that came read of the militia movement. >> host: are we nuts today more dangerous than point* -- prior decades? >> i do. there are a few reasons they are more dangerous. first of all, we nets are sometimes dismissed as the eccentric color on the bridge of the political landscape and harmless but in the some cases they are more powerful than ever. the polarization of the

party they are more polarized it is not your imagination. washington if you use to look at voting patterns it posted from the center know it is on the extremes. what that does is increase -- and creased the influence. we have also had redistricting try to get elected in states to save seats with no general election with a closed primary and secondary of polarization of the media. what type where we devolve back to the area where newspapers are on by political parties and now radio stations and television stations. now the internet. it has become the incubator for extremism and a method by which people recruit and radicalize and talk to each other all day long to greater extremes and it has enabled something where we so segregate ourselves in to

political reality of that can be dangerous. >> host: we will talk more ahead the first loan was identified to get you to explain the two syndromes. the bush to arrangement syndrome which was formed during the bush and administration no of mamadou arrangement syndrome. what are they and what gave rise to them and how our they manifested in today's political climate and? >> guest: it is a contagious political virus. the bush and obama derangements and dumb pathological hatred of the president posing as patriotism. it is important to understand the interplay because we saw some processors comparing president bush to hiller, a terrorist one of the things

i detail in a book here is a surprising winner of nobel prize winners comparing bush to hitler and did not get a lot of condemnation and politics follows the lines of physics their reaction creates the opposite in equal reaction. anytime somebody carries the helpers when they say they started it. they called our guy first and nobody complains and now we just get back. so they inside each other but now with obama we have seen something that is more prevalent that has metastasized much chrysler. obama's was announced on day one they called out for the obama resistance and we sought a major uptick in death threats right after election day through the first quarter a much higher level than previous and of course, if you follow the protests last year 50 party

protest i do not consider the wing nut method at all. the reaction to bailouts within you how the folks who suffer from serious case of obama could derangements syndrome this conservative activist ironic they started to embraces street theater confrontation politics obama's derangement syndrome it became prevalent. >> host: there was and not across the political spectrum but there did seem to be a moment where the country became unified over the hideous something completely different what happen to? >> guest: we were young. [laughter] >> it is amazing to look back and look at it dispassionately. obama's one 90% of a couple of days liberals and 20% of

conservatives hard to believe. he won the independence by the eighth point* margin it was more than any presidential candidate in 20 years and more than any democrat except lbj are fdr. it was a clear rejection to play politics both mccain and obama one renominate -- nominations by campaigning against and then politics got hijacked very quickly by the extremes in both parties who are interested. they profit from it person and want to perpetuate buy any means necessary is to make you suggest there may be some racial tone? the presence of the first african american president drives another anxiety from traditional white to minority led federal government.

how much does race play into that? >> guest: i do not think the vast majority of opposition is about a simple racism as he has joked he was black before the election. his first key victory was in his day with 96 percent whites, in this be 13 we are a long way from the stupak and brutal racism but with that said of think you can analyze politics but slavery is the original sin it has a fundamental fault line forever. and asci interview folks in the field, i start to figure out what it was and the dates came up with those are the dates that the census says america will have a non-white majority other

than the reflexive trick that reduces credibility it is more complex. we are witnessing the birth of white minority politics. it is a politics of anxiety about change. if you look at the way the protesters wrap themselves up with revolutionary war iconography they believe they are defending their heritage under threat from this president in the white house. one thing it comes up with a surprising amount comparing the president to hitler or mussolini very often they will say my country has been here for ex generations saying how long they have been in the country and there is a sense there i complicated or usurped by this president and it is at association of the late '60s when it was seen as anti-american but they are

exaggerated and hysterical and a way to account without just amiss dismissing. >> so far so good you're doing a terrific job 12 throws the floor opened for questions because it is on c-span2 we want to make sure we have a microphone in front of you. the we thing we ask for a mere question in the shape of a question. [laughter] >> i am from the upper west side of manhattan. i can accept the premise about wing nuts but i have referred to them as a right-wing nuts. because the right wing has a far bigger percentage of the republican party than they

do of the left. in your book you have sarah palin but now we have a lot list cheney there is nobody in the democratic party that has that kind of a leadership who could win an election and the bush earned his hatred because of the criminal tactics he used. >> i appreciate that and thank you. >> county default the democratic party which is fairly centrist? there are no rockefeller republicans. >> okay. i will answer. >> that is the point* that i get a lot if we're not going to stop the cycle of piper partisanship we are in which is getting increasingly extreme nablus we stand up on both sides if we focus our efforts on a defining

extremes will be on one side of the i/o we perpetuate the problem. the reality is there are extremes on both sides. scott brown was considered a homophobe and violence against women promoter. riverside has their extreme and those are two relatively mainstream books. of this book is not about them their powerful and influential we have to recognize if we stop this cycle before it gets out of control the only way to do with our center the politics is to be the honest brokers and not be caught up with high her partisan. >> we will move on. >> name one democrats. >> guest: i want you to buy the book. [laughter]

>> mr. avlon why would you call members of the tea party members wing mats? >> i said it was not. >> people are very disappointed i do not believe they are. i think it is very important in did try very hard to humanize people in the book to break the cycle you have to understand the views. if you look at when it started one year ago we began as a principal conservative protests against the bailout and deficit spending. and in fact, that is a reasonable and responsible tradition. it is hard to give people fired up but to that extent they deserve our thanks spelman they start to indulging i have a section how obama became the hitler anti-christ then they need to be denounce the problem is there are folks who

aren't announcing that kind of extremism. >> host: to dig a little deeper you said the teapartiers movement is not a wing nut movement that are other elements inside the two-party movement? >> i think there is obama's derangement syndrome they didn't indicate. it is infused with that does not mean it characterizes all of it if we get back onto the same page when nablus of the it of very american idea and raw land is enormously important that we punch back at the extremes because they hijacked our debate we also need to follow through on what unites us and that is important. >> to be very can find elements of wingnuts in every element. you mentioned in the book that has made it easier for

bring us to communicate and congregate to form online lobbies to create real leverage on party leadership. when you talk about the ability to reach people compared to decades past when they did not have the tool of the internet how much more powerful could a small group the than 20 or 30 years ago? >> in the past folks would be relatively isolated by the absurdity of their views. now you can find like-minded folks across the nation. that is a totally different dynamic. geography is no longer a barrier so you have the people who are isolated two congregate across state lines and the problem is politics are pushed more to the extremes you have more leverage. we have a dynamic reno where all of a sudden we have talk-radio hosts giving talking points to political

leaders rather than vice versa. we have political leaders are afraid to stand up to the extremes because they are afraid they will lose the primary. the internet is galvanizing the support and increasing influence and the volume. it is the largest lobbying bloc. there are few people letter hijacking the debate and the frustration is how come the vast majority of americans in the center, independents are the largest and fastest-growing sector it -- sector? they have been drowned out and they're frustrated by that. >> host: how many do the fractionalized aspect of mass media play into that? >> guest: it is a big part of it. we have the fragmentation of media so in this dynamic 51 to get high ratings to

appeal to the segment the professional political entertainers on the air and on the radio and not motivated by principal but by profit they want the highest ratings they can get so they will drum up whenever kind of incentives they can in order to stand out from the pack but the problem is what is good for ratings is not good for the country we have seen a massive decline in the credibility and trust of all media and they are seen as opinion anchors rather than striving for objectivity just like it doesn't seem like anybody tries to be a blink in any more and this creates a problem because even c-span has experienced a decline of believability. the unedited coverage people are literally not be leaving what they see with their own eyes because they are so

used to be spun to death. has a toll and only exacerbates the problems. >> i am from the union square area. weird you put the progressives who criticize bush but also now increasingly are criticizing the president as moving to the center if not to the right and what about the progressives that call for the impeachment of bush on substantive grands? bereday preshow your question to those fears in the heartland of america we are in the home town of manhattan and i love it. [laughter] it is important to appreciate that the dynamic that you are describing which is the far left liberals and progressives which is a different terms or will not use that term that liberals are

criticizing the obama on the left but the far right is convinced obama is a secret socialist the four left thing see is a corporate sellout so a reality check to get your heads in the current debate. folks on the left believe that they hated president bush on principle now they think obama is the sellout and now the extremes are emboldened even the democratic party the dynamic is going on the same we see in the republican party. conservatives? we hate bush but now we really hate to the communist. it is the same dynamic. benjamin franklin said we must all doubt all little bit of our own infallibility and what you are describing is the mirror image of a lot of folks on the conservative populace. >> how difficult is it to live in the middle? >> it is a good place to be.

we just don't know it. you used to liberals collier conservative and vice versa we have an incredible dumb down version for the last decade that divides the country into red verses blue states and the far left verses far right and the reality is that is a lot. look at any map that shows how people vote to there reflects lee scott brown election which is supposedly the stereotypical liberal state and 51 percent independent living out a number democrats or republicans right now. we have been artificially divided and forced into a bitter and predictable partisanship. but is why independence are the fastest-growing segment. we need to realize there are more of us and them.

>> what we hear more from the independence? >> analogous to what happened with the first female senator ever elected to the senate in 1950's from maine was the first person in the senate to stand up and denounce to mccarthy a republican in her own party and she did it alone with a declaration conscience and said the vast majority in the center stand up to the violence of the extreme right and extreme left and we straightened our civic backbone and should be intimidated silencing clear the conscience and that is the moment we're at today. those of us in the senate that was to put patriotism ahead of partisanship to stand up and straight in the civic backbone and take the power back from the extremes. >> there are some statistics of the book but when people say how much power does the center really have? you cite recent elections in

percentages gained by people who were moderate versus those who were polarized. do remember those statistics? >> to use a couple the fog is that they are weak and not very powerful blow to getters. this is the goal line when president eisenhower in 1952 was called the general who won world war ii was called the candidate of the feminist by the far-right republicans a were i shut -- isolation is not wanting to fight in world war ii john mccain it was 74% of the vote because he is in the center of his party which is why he is being primary from the right. olympia snowe and susan collins win decisively in the democrat state with two republican senators now because they are weak but strong in the center. dick lugar wins the election

overwhelmingly where only a few states the way rick santorum a conservative senator gets his but kicked semi j.d. hayworth. >> the strength is in the center it is there for everybody to see the we have been fed the dumb down version and they are so invested in telling everybody their way is the only way that franklyestroy it. >> let's go to the audience. >> i am from brooklyn. this is why we live in a prozac nation because of the confusion. i try to understand and i consider myself with bush at derangement syndrome i think i have that. >> three recovered? >> slightly. [laughter] i still don't like him but i fell into it. my question is this may be

philosophical but if people think the country has shifted so far right in comparison to last 40 years, it looks like it ships back and forth record you think it has shifted so far to the right, a center-right is not the true center it is the center do see what i am saying? >> i got it. the point* is that it is not a true position it is always a relative to the extremes that anytime. >> typically it is usually slightly center-right. that is what people forget they are a center-right nation but it is a center-right nation not a right nation. that is how they lose

elections. [laughter] to your point*, do the second point* is important because there is a reality check. some folks have been pushing the 80 eligible point* the missteps they want to have a checklist you are a good honest republican. >> this is just after the incident in new york. >> exactly. talking to conservatives come they always hold up reagan and goldwater as the icons but the irony is that reagan and goldwater could not pass that liv is tested a goldwater was approached face and in favor of gays in decades a gay it the reagan grew the direct and presided over tax increases when necessary and both principal people but leaders of the movement that when you try to dumb down politics and make it one-size-fits-all history has a sense of humor.

the reality is goldwater and ragged would not be considered conservatives today that those opposite people not acting like sentinels in the movement. >> host: wait for the microphone. >> i hate to ask. i am from that area. but i hate to wrest a liberal question but if they don't give these people attention will that not diffuse their power? how do see your book changing the discourse around the issue? >> a great question one i have had from very senior people that you only feed the folks with attention. but i think politicians will pander to the air reaches particularly if they feel they cannot get away with it. they will use fear and hate

in the service of piper partisanship. and i believe sunshine is the best disinfectant if you shine a light on these extremes and make him the issue become political kryptonite and politicians cannot use them they cannot effectively divide to conquer. it is more important to call them out and shine a light and redoing so we take the power back. instead we define the terms. it is a great question. >> host: even if mainstream media did not shine light on these people there are plenty of people who are making millions of dollars per year fueling the outrage veterans them the money so they will get plenty of exposure anyway. >> guest: exactly. that is ultimately stop this. the center will lose the fight weather and politics are publishing or the media

if we constantly played defense. the reality is we do have the numbers for only 50% of the country defines itself as conservative republican but 11 percent liberal democrats but that is true. the vast majority of us are in the middle. but yet we have been written out of the political process. the only way to take that power back is to begin to approach the problem as a position of strength. to do that we will find that those folks in the center have the largest untapped market. >> host: one more question from the back. >> i am from the area. just to turn the argument over on its head, isn't it what the founding fathers envisioned with action new-line against the other in terms of sharing arguments? they rented doesn't it

energize between the far left and the far right which eventuate involves middle america? what is so wrong with the wing nuts? i am concerned when you talk about stopping that isn't up the idea to have free speech and allow people to express themselves? >> i appreciate that question. thank you this is a great debate. there is nothing more american than the 80 lots to go live support it is as american as apple pie. it is absolutism disguised as apple pie i'm not saying obama was not born in america but i am just asking the question. the wind is right now like to wrap themselves up in the american flag and this is the sense they are the two defenders of the founding fathers and it is the idea

that if a political party should presume to own the american flag or the bible the founding fathers as a reality check said were focused on new 19 the nation no dividing for the founding fathers hamilton madison warned about the dangers of faction that is what "the federalist papers" are all about. i close the book with george washington in just because going back to the first principles. take a look at his prayer will address to the nation. he warned against say there is no greater threat than the demagogue who would agitate the community with false alarms broke kindling the animosity of one parts against the other and warned against those who would serve to organize to give it the artificial and extraordinary force to put into place a delicate role of the nation and of the party. washington one dusts about

the bring us. keep that in mind. >> host: as you say my country has been replaced by my party right or wrong that. >> guest: dad is right for the we had a total flip one of the telltale signs of the wing that they can use patriotism with partisanship and the idea that it is in danger of replacing the country you cannot respect the country and demonize the president. there is an old idea where they do lee elected president even if you disagree you respect the office because we try to take a larger view that seems to be out of fashion and that the national interest will trump special-interest. roi began the book with a quote most people remember rush limbaugh in turn and help to set the tone we have seen and said i hope he fails.

okay. after jfk won the election, john wayne committed conservative said i did not vote for him but he is my president and i hope the does a good job. how do we fall from that idea? headed we convince ourselves that that is eight / statement? that is what puts patriotism over partisanship and that is where it should be and an important reminder if we lost sight of politics to our great detriment. >> this is the issue i found fascinating the consequences and we suggested there were some differences in terms of consequences for democrats or republicans. you say "liberals a one to ignore the populist anger of the two parties in town hall do so at their own political peril producing just they

are more grave than republicans but they play a dangerous game in benefiting from all of the tanker in the short term but tapped into something they cannot control it is far beyond street theater that intentionally stirs decrease the pot that ultimately is the incitement to violence. why do political consequences for democrats and potentially by the end for republicans? >> guest: in the case of the protests that sometimes turn violent over the last summer we have a lot of democrats trying to tell them sells it was astroturf. i think after they lost the elections were democrats realize there is something profound going on. this is not a small member of folks by genuine grass-roots anger. america is the center

origination but there is a point* some may to benefit politically from people who bombed of piper partisanship extremes are your own worst enemy if they provoke a backlash. but that is a deeper element of concern because there is a cost to all of this. when dick armey house majority leader a real promoter of the teapartiers movement is quoted as one major rally as saying nearly every important office in washington d.c. today is occupied by some with an aggressive dislike for our heritage, freedom, history and constitution. when you stir them up hate and fear you are with forces

that can get easily add of control. there was a report a few weeks ago to have the increase of the number of militia groups in the first year that is what i call the hate tree groups. one of the ideas and into a few folks is they believe they are defending the constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. the need to speak to them they think obama might be a domestic enemy as defined under the constitution you will see able come out in two weeks which i cannot reveal yet but it low at numbers to that. it is not insignificant and one of the of men the death threats the president got was from camp lejeune as the letter of intent to assassinate a bomb and he identified him as a domestic enemy of the constitution

they have consequences and not in a vacuum. if we play with eight or partisanship we reap a whirlwind and we should know that. >> host: questions from the audience again. >> i am from new york. to what extent do think that our system rewards partisanship because when they break along the lines they do it further than the democrats. i am not sure they just have less diversity of the truth i feel because of fact. >> you guys can have a beer afterwards. [laughter] >> i feel republicans accomplished a lot more

because of how maybe they have better whips or something but to a certain extent our sister rewards this kind of partisanship and what are your thoughts? >> guest: increasingly it had because the rules have been raised. large problem of politics the reason we are suffering through artificial polarization is because of redistricting that pushes parties to the extremes. it is important to realize the system of collusion by eliminating general elections candidates are not rewarded that have the incentive to reach across the aisle they're constantly there to play to the base this has created a whole generation of politicians but it is to i call the limbaugh brigade there is no such thing. they are preoccupied and they get away whereas

normally in the past they would lose the general election every time because they are to polarizing with michelle berman on the right to and both are very fond of calling upon its evil. and losing fundamentally site of the fact that we're all in the same poach but it has distorted that view and has a structure where people play to the base. of we could do one policy position, create a different structure, a nonpartisan and redistricting reform and ( mary's. >> i think i what is one of those states is there any evidence of less wing nuts in those states than others? looking at to new hampshire.

it is generally where it nominates a more centrist candidate but the iowa caucus you can control that actually it is a great state it is where independents outnumber democrats or republicans but because of the caucus system that political balance is not reflected in the way is alexei president. but it is analogous to overall win because the independent can go to new hampshire primary the candidates don't play as far to the right or to the base because i have to win of the poachers and the center. and they hate to that but the problem is the party has got to the way of what is good for the country. the constitution does not mention parties they are

middlemen and i argue they've outlived their usefulness. >> host: talking about the idea of redistricting and changing the formula we have had gaston are program whose say just a gridlock in congress and is a reflection of that as well. if you were to rewrite the rules across the country could be potentially not all the damp down the wing nut but also get things moving and congress? >> you could because there be a positive incentive but now instead if you even write the op-ed fed town halls are shouted at as traders. we have confused the idea of cooperation with collaboration in the world were $0.2 her is a real problem because the founders wanted to focus on the common ground too not of politics predetermined get to figure out the common

elements but that is stopped by politics that condemns any form of government. >> host: we have time for a couple more questions. >> i am from new jersey. i want to know why do think the political spectrum has been split into two? would you call an extremist from the old whig party? [laughter] >> we call them whiggy. [laughter] >> otherwise you might see what we see and israel. the desire is this is what causes independence to grow the fastest growing sentiment is in direct

expression in reaction of the anger and dissatisfaction with the choice is weird given especially because they are so polarizing most independents are social libertarians and fiscal conservative it is not they aren't fiscally conservative perhaps but it has been slow stratus five and hijacked and that neither party has been able to get itself enough the way from the special interest of the party to meet that need. there is a market disconnect. that is what is happening right now and especially among the young pros. those of us growing up with multiple choices of every aspect of our lives in politics is the last place we are expected to be choosing between brand a o our brand to be. they have not woken up to information age reality but

they are going to but the question is to the wake of sooner or later? >> do street the third or fourth party could help to tamp down some of this? >> i think we're looking at that time were there is a third-party there's a couple of scenarios down the line review could see the far right split off from the republican party and from the democratic party and the centrist realize all along they have a lot more in common with each other than the extremes part of that is one option that sits right in front of us. these forces that plays politics are shifting i can see that as much as any other. >> i am a visiting canadian. [laughter] but we are paying attention out there. i want to rescue. >> if memory serves me you are a former politician. >> yes.

[laughter] i am a former canadian. >> it is a little naive to talk about the center taking power again without taking a town of obvious which i think tend to prefer the extremes part of your a lobbyist you know, where the extreme part stance but the guy in the middle will be reasonable is more of a problem. >> guest: not is easy to buy off for you raise a good point*. but i would say the ultimate trump card is democracy for a lobbyist and politicians have a funny way of listening to numbers. they will go to the maturities but the problem is they can successfully subdivide our country and the special interest has succeeded to their benefit. you are right but this fundamentally and representative. i just think the whole key is to balance idealism with

realism. we need to recognize there is a disconnect. we don't need to buy into the high her version that has been hijacked. there will always be cranks and a conspiracy theorist but we do not have to except the domination of the politics. that is that we can stand up to the extremes. >> host: but one more point* standing up to the extremism you say in the chapter of solutions the moderate majority needs to stand up to the extremes before they spark a real season of violence. we have done this before and we can do it again. put it into historic context and how we do it again now? when the wing nuts have such a powerful megaphone they did not have in the past? >> guest: it is an important question. there is a fundamental case for optimism. you have extremist groups

and have confronted the kkk and far left radical groups that are incredibly violent only 30 or 40 years ago or defeated the john birch society now it is back institut joe mccarthy. so whenever anybody tells you yellow lines and dead armadillos you trump them with dwight eisenhower said extremes of left and right there in the deader the center is down the middle. i think we can take america back from the lunatic fringe because we have the numbers they may be screaming larger but they don't have the votes were the bodies and the three things we can do first more to declare independence and giveaway of always excusing the extremes because they may be crazy

but they are our crazy. more americans declared independence and the parties will have to compete for their vote. they cannot take them for granted. already the party should be panicked about the fact 40 percent of the american public has rejected them. they're in denial. declare independence. second is a policy prescription repaid to undo the redistricting. we have open primaries it would incentivize politicians to move to the center and all political consultants that preach politics they will change their tune overnight because it is not about principles as it is by winning and they will change the rules of the work with they are made by man and we can change them to seven where do come down on the argument of rehabilitation of the

fairness doctrine. >> guest: i am against it because it is a speech code that is unenforceable in america baidu relieve the only cure for bad speech is more speech we need to ring gauge it more and stand up. that is the final thing that we need to stand up in the center him play offense as we dictate and if we can shift the momentum and the dynamics and approach from strength and offense we can take the power back from the extremes because we have the numbers. extremist have a terrible sense of humor. they are very rigid. if we can call off the absurdities for the cost of a three can do that. we can punch left and right and stand up to the extremes on both sides we can