The headline: GOP Losses Could Spark Partisan Warfare. The opinion piece masquerading as a news article goes on to describe a number of scenarios of what could transpire if the Republicans lose one or both chambers in November.
The White House is bracing for guerrilla warfare on the homefront politically if Republicans lose control of the House, the Senate or both — and with it, the president's ability to shape and dominate the national agenda.
Republicans are battling to keep control of Congress. But polls and analysts in both parties increasingly suggest Democrats will capture the House and possibly the Senate on Election Day Nov. 7.
Democrats need a 15-seat pickup to regain the House and a gain of six seats to claim the Senate.
Everything could change overnight for President Bush, who has governed for most of the past six years with a Republican Congress and with little support from Democrats.
"Every session you change the way you do business with the Congress. And you test the mood of the Congress, find out what their appetite will be. But it doesn't change your priorities," the president told ABC News.
Former President Clinton had to deal with the Democrats' loss of control of Congress in 1994. But Clinton had something Bush does not: six more years to regain his footing.
Bush has barely over two years left. The loss of either house in voting next month could hasten Bush's descent into a lame-duck presidency.
"If he loses one house here, President Bush will enter the last two years very wounded," said David Gergen, a former White House adviser who served in the administrations of Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton.
"He will have the capacity to say no to Democratic legislation, but he won't have the capacity to say yes to his own legislation," said Gergen, who teaches at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.
Democratic victories essentially could block Bush's remaining agenda and usher in a period of intense partisan bickering over nearly every measure to come before Congress.
Loss of either chamber also could subject his administration to endless congressional inquiries and investigations.
The president and chief political strategist Karl Rove last week expressed renewed confidence of retaining both House and Senate; others are not so upbeat.
"All of our numbers look pretty bad and there's no question that there's a jet stream in our face," said House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Furthermore, some of Bush's fighting in the trenches is likely to be with fellow Republicans as they seek to find a new standard bearer for 2008 — and distance themselves from an unpopular war, the unpopular president who waged it, and congressional scandals that include inappropriate e-mails to House pages from ex-Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla.
Keep flogging as many "scandals" as possible, maybe one will stick somewhere. Because up until now it has been nothing but bi-partisan cooperation and a mutual admiration society, right? Oh wait. The author of this "article" neglects to mention a few things.Like Nancy Pelosi's admission that she has been following advice to try to, "take him (the president) down" and obstructing at every turn. And look who would be in charge if the Democrats take over:
Some of Bush's sharpest critics would rise to top positions with a Democratic takeover.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., probably would become speaker. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., a foe of extending Bush tax cuts, would become chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.
Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, who has sponsored legislation calling for steps that could open the way to Bush's impeachment, would lead the Judiciary Committee.
If Democrats win the Senate, Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada — one of the most outspoken of all Bush critics — probably would ascend to majority leader.
Gee, that would be the same people who have been obstructing and trying to "take him down" at every turn.
Still think it's a good idea to sit out the election, folks? Think it has been bad up until now?