Didn't he work for Bush?

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 12, 2011, at 19:39, "David R. Block" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Curious how McKinnon, well known in Texas as a DEMOCRAT, is billed as a 
> Republican by Politico. 
> 
> David 
> 
> "Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people 
> do is a swine."--P. J. O’Rourke
> 
> On 10/12/2011 2:40 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> 
>>  
>> If the parties won't solve problems
>> By: Mark McKinnon
>> October 12, 2011 02:04 PM EDT
>> 
>> Support for the two major political parties in America is hemorrhaging. It’s 
>> not hard to see why.
>> 
>> The politerati point to the 1992 presidential campaign as the last time 
>> public dissatisfaction with the political environment was so pervasive that 
>> a disruption to the status quo was even possible. Third-party independent 
>> candidate Ross Perot briefly led incumbent President George H.W. Bush and 
>> challenger Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton. If he had maintained credibility, 
>> Perot might well have won.
>> 
>> But discontent today is far deeper. In 1992, just 39 percent of the public 
>> was dissatisfied with government. Today, a record high 81 percent is 
>> dissatisfied. Satisfaction has plummeted from 59 percent to just 19 percent. 
>> We are in uncharted waters.
>> 
>> If we were ripe for disruption in 1992, today most Americans must be damn 
>> close to grabbing their pitchforks and storming the barricades of the 
>> nation’s capital. King George was more beloved.
>> 
>> This thirst for dramatic change isn’t just Republican voters unhappy with 
>> the Obama administration’s policies. Democratic guru James Carville told 
>> CNN’s Erin Burnett last week: “There is a real yearning for something 
>> different in this country. It is going to produce something, I have no idea 
>> what, but something is coming here, I promise you.”
>> 
>> What accounts for this dramatic shift? Obviously, there is deep concern 
>> about a terrible economy and long, costly foreign conflicts. But there is 
>> something more dangerous: a fundamental breakdown in trust in government.
>> 
>> We send our representatives to Washington to fix problems. Yet every day 
>> offers examples of opportunities lost. We’ve gone from statesmanship to 
>> brinksmanship. Compromise means victory for the opposing party. Consensus 
>> means the loss of political leverage. And scoring political points seems 
>> more important than progress on policy.
>> 
>> Americans now have largely negative views of both parties. The public sees 
>> little difference between the effectiveness of either party when it comes to 
>> tackling the economy. And only 9 percent of likely voters rate Congress’ 
>> performance as good or excellent.
>> 
>> Republicans in Congress refuse tax increases, labeling them job-killing. 
>> (It’s hard to negotiate when you’ve signed a pledge, as most Republicans and 
>> a few Democrats have, binding you to no new taxes and linking subsidy 
>> elimination to rate decreases.) Democrats refuse spending cuts, also 
>> labeling them job-killing.
>> 
>> Yet, by a 2-to-1 margin, Americans support doing both, increasing taxes and 
>> cutting spending. [ BF emphasis added ]
>> 
>> Unable to negotiate the policy changes necessary to avert the next financial 
>> crisis, Congress has deferred responsibility to a supercommittee. If an 
>> agreement is not reached there, automatic and dramatic across-the-board cuts 
>> kick in. The public is not hopeful: 74 percent think the committee will not 
>> reach agreement.
>> 
>> Voters feel increasingly disenfranchised. No party represents them. Fringe 
>> groups with microphones dominate the conversation. Super PACs with unlimited 
>> funding exert unlimited influence. Powerful political advocacy groups skirt 
>> disclosure rules.
>> 
>> I helped co-found No Labels to fight back against the hyper-partisanship and 
>> special interests now holding the system hostage. What we hear from voters 
>> is they want members of Congress to put their labels aside — and work 
>> together.
>> 
>> Often it’s not policy outcomes that are problematic — the very nature of the 
>> debate is contributing to the loss of confidence. [ BF emphasis added ]
>> 
>> The debt-ceiling debate caused the consumer confidence index to collapse to 
>> its fourth lowest level since first measured in 1952, according to the 
>> pollster Bill McInturf,. The index today sits at 55. That’s more than 20 
>> points below the average when a sitting president loses reelection.
>> 
>> The debt-ceiling debate was just one in the seemingly never-ending examples 
>> of the parties’ inability to forge consensus on anything — from contentious 
>> stimulus spending and health care reforms, to simple continuing budget 
>> resolutions. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), by triggering the 
>> “nuclear option” in the Senate this week to block GOP amendments, only 
>> escalated the party standoff.
>> 
>> If the Republicans and Democrats in Washington cannot set aside their party 
>> loyalty, then the people are most likely to declare their independence 
>> again. Almost a third of voters today do not affiliate with either party, 
>> and 55 percent of Americans say a third party is needed.
>> 
>> Skeptics cite all the usual reasons why a third-party or alternative 
>> nominating process won’t work. But it’s mostly just pattern recognition. 
>> It’s the same reason they said we’d never elect an African-American 
>> president. Because we hadn’t, they said we wouldn’t.
>> 
>> These are different times. I don’t know how it’s going to happen. It could 
>> be the Americans Elect platform, or it could be in a self-funded independent 
>> candidacy, or a tea party candidate.
>> 
>> But, I’m with Carville on this one: Something is coming.
>> 
>> Mark McKinnon, a co-founder of No Labels, a trans-partisan organization, is 
>> a Republican                           strategist who served as chief media 
>> adviser for George W. Bush and John McCain.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
>> <[email protected]>
>> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
>> Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
> -- 
> Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
> <[email protected]>
> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
> Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to