Clinton: Losing House Would Help Obama in 2012

When asked if President Obama's reelection chances might be improved if the Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives in the midterms, Mr. Clinton said yes.

The former president discussed the current state in Washington, in relation to his own two terms in office; Democrats lost control in Congress after a rise in anti-government fervor in 1994, and yet President Clinton was able to score several major legislative victories with the help of Republicans.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/ ... 1548.shtml


Palin on GOP Leaders: "They're Not Likin' This"

"We're gonna take back our country and we're gonna turn things around!"

She was campaigning for Republican Senatorial hopeful Rand Paul, one of the Tea Party insurgents she has endorsed - sometimes to the chagrin of GOP regulars who worry they are too extreme, unelectable, or both.

It's a reaction she apparently relishes.

"The hierarchy, and, you know, they're not likin' this,"

But Democratic strategists say the more Sarah, the better for them.

"The very best organizer and fundraiser for the Democratic Party is going to be here in Iowa - Sarah Palin," said David Plouffe.

Indeed, CBS News' latest polling shows the number of Americans viewing Palin unfavorably has been rising along with her visibility - 40 percent unfavorable in August, 46 percent unfavorable today.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/ ... ml?tag=dis

Oh no...I agree with Clinton!!

Been sayin' the same thing for awhile Wayne. I think the best thing for the reps and tea party would be to not get a majority in any of the 3, but get darn close so no more of these destructive programs can pass. Then in 2012, sweep the bums (including the rest of the career GOP people) out.

My personal opinion, (and it does not reflect that of anyone but me) is that not one party should control the whole thing. It is bad for this country when that happens.

navycpo7 wrote: My personal opinion, (and it does not reflect that of anyone but me) is that not one party should control the whole thing. It is bad for this country when that happens.

I completely agree....power corrupts. Both parties prove it.

I just want to get rid of every single person who has been in office more than 10 yrs.

I completely agree also that no one party should control the whole thing, and have stated that several times in the past.

And maybe, just maybe, the parties would actually compromise to get bills passed!!!! Both sides could write the bills instead of Pelosi's gang of lawyers & rubber stamped by Barack.

If the American voters decide they want a particular party representing them, and enough vote that way, that's what happens. It's not like the Democrats somehow took control of both Houses without people voting for it. Voters vote for their candidates and this time around they voted for more Democrats than Republicans -- thus Democrats control both houses.

Democrats tried to get Republican input on bills but the party of "no" would have nothing to do with it.

It's going to be interesting with the Tea Party candidates, as they get elected and try to work with the Republicans in place to effect legislation or move forward on issues. I wonder if the party of "no" will stonewall the Tea Party candidates, too?

One thing's for certain, things are going to get all mavericky in Washington.