"Obama's Rule" -- Another GOP Lie

For the past few years, I've been noticing a disturbing political trend. It's not just the political rancor and the huge divide in what constitutes in this country as "The Right" and "The Left." It's that we've been so divided that it's no longer a matter of disagreement on our interpretations of reality. We are now actually disagreeing on the facts that constitute said reality.

In my limited contact with some of those on the Right and self-proclaimed Tea Party members, I've sometimes wondered, Where the hell did you come up with that? Despite what some who know me may think, I readily admit that I don't know everything. However, I am a mild political junkie. Yet, sometimes someone on the Right will say or post something or share an article that leaves me absolutely baffled. I have no clue what they're talking about and oftentimes can't even find out where what they're saying is actually coming from.

This happened a couple of weeks ago when a Tea Partier I'm following on Twitter posted an article about "Obama's Rule," which, according to the article (which, unfortunately, I can't find a link to now), is currently strangling the Congo. Now, there was actually a new regulation placed on the electronics industry in the Dodd-Frank Bill, forcing them to provide proof that their gold, coltan, tungsten, and tin ore have neither come from conflict regions within the Democratic Republic of Congo or has been provided by the "warlords" in that country. While intended just for certain regions of the Congo, the article I read (and many self-interested business leaders and Republican politicians) asserted that this new regulation is strangling the entire country.

Obama Will Want the Anal Probe: The Latest Teapublican Logic

The other day I had the distinct pleasure of listening to the Left's favorite "moderate" Republican, David Frum, on the radio. The question was: Who will you be voting for on Tuesday? Coming as a complete surprise, Frum waxed profound about why he was going to vote a straight Republican ticket.

His primary reasoning was that the country is in collapse and absolutely nothing that Obama has done has worked. In fact, if it hadn't been for Bush's TARP, this country would totally be in the shitter. (Funny how the Teapublicans have been hanging TARP around Obama's neck for the last two years, but, now that it seems to have been somewhat effective, at least Frum wants to take credit for it.) Basically, The Big Brother is utterly incompetent, and Frum claimed that the reason behind this buffoonery is because Obama has refused to lead. He has basically let the Democrats ride him like a brokeback bronco, and Obama has simply been presiding instead of being Presidential. Frum believes, if his party takes over one or both houses of Congress tomorrow, Obama will be forced to compromise, be forced to become a leader, and that he should actually embrace such an opportunity.

Now, since Obama's presidential election victory and the Republicans got booted out of power, I have heard from certain GOP quarters a queer sort of nostalgia for the days of Clinton and Newt. They speculate that this is perhaps the best way that the American government should be run--a Dem in the White House and Cons running the legislature. They speak fondly of the balanced budget, the projected budget surpluses, and all that economic prosperity of the late 1990s.