OMG! There's actually talk - and publicly no less - about the replacement of the Democratic leadership in the House should the Republicans steamroll the November elections as many are predicting.
Now mind you, that talk isn't spoken in the presence of Speaker Nancy Pelosi because she still has the power and spite to make life miserable. And should the GOP make gains but still lack control, the current Speaker would remain and there would be hell to pay.
Call me a cautious conservative - which actually might be redundant. I hold high hopes for this November but I also recognize the electorate is a fickled dame and what holds true in September might not become reality come November.
The President - "They treat me like a dog" Obama - used last week's "economic" campaign to pull no punches on the partisan front. In Wisconsin and later in Ohio, the President went into full campaign mode and lashed out at the GOP leadership on a dozen or so different fronts. He painted a gloomy portrait should the Republicans get the upper hand in November.
But deep within the corners of the White House, I suspect the President would not be disappointed with a change in the House leadership. Often upstaged by the controversial Speaker, a shift in the House power would provide ample opportunities for the President to point his familiar accusing finger of blame squarely at the GOP.
That will come in handy when voters want someone to blame in November 2012.
And from a pragmatic point of view, the movement of Speaker Pelosi out of the limelight would be a good move for the Democrats. She - perhaps even more than the President - is the touchstone of discontent for the GOP. Have you noticed Congressman Emerson's television spots? They mention Madame Speaker, not the President.
The Senate side of the election equation is a bit murky. It's unlikely that the GOP will gain the seats needed to topple Harry Reid. But the Democratic party may do that regardless given his astoundingly low approval numbers.
There is but one successful path the GOP can travel to prevail in November 2012. We need to hear the steady drumbeat of reduced spending for the next two years. That discussion must contain teeth to be effective.
I wrote last week of "shared sacrifice" and some readers took umbrage with that assessment declaring that they had already sacrificed enough. Seriously?
If we are to reduce the deficit even with a tax increase, the numbers simply don't add up. Do the math yourself instead of relying of MSNBC.
To balance our nation's budget requires a serious discussion on entitlement reduction. Perhaps the grand deficit commission will say those words this December when their report is completed. And if that is their conclusion - which would take guts - then the GOP has a tailor-made program on which to expose the differences between the two agendas.
That's a whole lot of "ifs". But it may be the only plan that works.