DON'T BE A DICK: Four Principles of the New Republican Mentality

[Joanne98]

For OpEdNews: Lee Patton - Writer

"I don't want to pay for your neighbor's breast cancer," a recent retiree blurted during a discussion of health care reform. A very satisfied new recipient of Medicare services (triple-bypass heart surgery), he added, "Who knows whether it's her fault or not? Bottom line, it's not fair. It's her problem, not mine."
Let's call him Dick. He stands for the New Republican, and if polls are accurate he may well reflect today's average American. Since we believe in majority rule, we'd better try to understand the way Dick thinks because Dick may soon be ruling us. Again.

For most of his life, Dick was not engaged in politics. His parents were Republicans, and when he first signed up to vote, he checked "R" because that's what his dad said to do. He's not a Tea Party fanatic. Sarah Palin fascinates him less for her right-wing agenda than some librarian-letting-down-her-hair fantasy. Most of all, Dick is not a socially evolved Republican in the mold of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, or Earl Warren. Dick cannot name the historic accomplishments of these three GOP giants. They are vague figures in that dim, featureless era he calls "the past."

Dick has been successful in business -- real estate -- and in personal relationships. He's maintained a respectful marriage and raised decent, healthy kids. He's a good guy to chat with about the weather, pet antics, stock market angst, and action flicks. Concerning politics, though, this New Republican has a maddening, seemingly illogical mentality. Despite his adult accomplishments and status as a grandfather, when it comes to the public arena -- societal concerns, community necessities -- he is mentally arrested. To call his political mentality childish is to insult children.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/DON-T-BE-A-DICK--Four-Pri-by-Lee-Patton-101020-33.html

[Yavapai]

1. So many Dicks, So few Richards....

[celestia671]

2. True

I know so many people like that. They can't back up their political arguments. They just believe what they believe.

[tridim]

3. How can we change this?

It's destroying my country.

[MrsCorleone]

4. Media reform. nt

[SusanaMontana41]

8. Huh? What kind of "reform" are you advocating?

What kind of limits would you impose on a free press? And you do know that whatever limits you want codified would be unconstitutional, right?

Such talk about "media reform" scares the sh*t out of me. How about changing our political system instead?

[MedicalAdmin]

10. It 'scares the shit out of you?'

Well, isn't that too bad Mrs. Cheney? (sorry for the hyperbole - but I'm making a point - it ain't personal)

How about a return to the fairness doctrine? Yes, the press should be free, but if they are using any public medium (airwaves - utility right of ways - etc) then they need to present all aspects of an issue. We devolved from some thoughtful investigative journalism (eg. part one of a 4 part investigation used to be pretty normal) to sound bites and unvetted opinion.

And you think this is OK? The system is OK as far as I can see. It's just stacked to the gills with industry shills and paid dupes. I would support regulation on lobbying by companies and lobbying firms as well as the revolving politician to lobbyist shill to politician door.

What do you think needs reform?

[MrsCorleone]

12. With all due respect, a free press no longer exists.

The media deregulations of the '80s and, more profoundly, in the '90s have led to what we have today, a concentration of ownership largely among just a handful of large multinationals. Keep in mind that multinationals are just that, multinational. These corps have no allegiance to the people of this country, only to the bottom line.

Now, one of the important aspects of the deregulations that took place over the decades was the elimination of ownership rules. Before these safeguards were stripped away, ownership of newspapers, radio stations, and TV networks was spread among thousands of individual owners and entities, since it was illegal to own more than a certain number of media outlets in a particular region. This created an abundance and diversity of news content, which allowed for the peeps to make more informed decisions about the policies that affected us all.

What we have now, since media ownership is now in the hands of a very few, is a twisted reality of the news that is specifically designed sway public opinion in favor of policies that are beneficial to corporate profit and not the American people. This is why you have so many low information voters out in the streets rooting for corporate friendly policies and against their own, and that of their fellow Americans', best interests. More importantly, and tragically, the media has convinced so many to go beyond just rallying in the streets. The so-called "free press" of today has so profoundly confused these deluded peeps into enthusiastically voting in the most corrupt public officials. This is beneficial to the multinationals and not the rest of us.

So until there is media reform that will somehow reinstate some of the regulations that will allow for the free flow of factual information once again, the peeps will remain woefully uninformed and ignorant, and these peeps will continue to support the very policies that hurt us all.

I hope this clarifies my view on media reform.

[pscot]

5. These new Republicans

sound a lot like the old ones.

[The Wizard]

6. The weak minded and selfish

being hoodwinked by appeals to their worst fears and lowest instincts. That's the Republican formula.

[BobTheSubgenius]

7. What an excellent article!

The real irony is that anyone accurately described by this piece would never recognize the facts of the matter.

[Zoeisright]

9. That is a really fabulous piece of writing.

It should be required reading for ANYONE before they vote.

[briteleaf]

11. The problem and the cure

Human beings have survived for millions of years being greedy. Our genetic ancestors all too often survived because they were greedy. The successful hunter stuffed himself with liver before carrying game back to the tribe. The successful gatherer gorged themselves on the food that they picked or dug up before bringing the basket of food back to share with the tribe. It might sound ugly but the truth is that these greedy folks are the ones who survived tough times. Dick is one of these. How many millionaires and billionaires are working long hours to earn more? They're buying gold bars to amass in hidden, Swiss bank accounts instead of sharing with others. If we were honest, wouldn't we be able to look around and admit that most folks center their lives/vocation around earning money so that they can acquire the things that money can buy? It's not just Republicans either. Democrats are cut from the same cloth. Greed is the scourge of humankind, responsible for more destruction than all the diseases and all the wars on the planet. Doesn't sound like it's an easy thing to fix but...
When will we begin to teach our students philosophy and political philosophy? Education is the only way for people to understand the benefits of society and social programs. The interests of the rich are the interests of the poor. Anyone, at any time, can become the victim of debilitating disease. In the 21st century, businesses go out of business regularly. In these times, anyone can lose their jobs or lose their business. Many of us are in denial of our own vulnerability. Education is the best way to learn. The process takes time but when a child learns to share and the importance of sharing, they become adults who teach their children these life lessons. Finally, their mental scope enlarges enough for them to be able to appreciate the funding of social programs. Without the benefit of education, the only way Dick can learn the benefits of social programs is to lose his job or have the doctor explain that he has been diagnosed with .... and has to begin his long, expensive treatment immediately.