Change: the empty word

[bemildred]

It's hard to think of a more meaningless political watchword than "change," but "change" is what the presidential candidates are promising.

Barack Obama's endless repetition of the word won him the Iowa caucuses, prompting other Democratic and Republican presidential candidates to make it their mantra too. Hillary Clinton and John McCain won in New Hampshire by arguing that they too wanted change and that they had the experience necessary to bring it about.

In a Fox News interview Jan. 8, Mitt Romney, who seems less a candidate than a human weather vane, got into the act as well. He managed to utter the word "change" four times in response to a single question. "Change," reported Time magazine's Michael Duffy after the New Hampshire results came in, "is the undisputed theme" of 2008.

But why? Since when did "change" become the Holy Grail of American politics -- and what can the word possibly mean if all these disparate candidates are for it?

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-noah13jan13,0,7499808.story?coll=la-opinion-center

[Snarkoleptic]

1. So true.

Without specifics, change could mean new driver with the same roadmap.

[nannah]

2. I always enjoy your posts bemildred; and i love your name

perhaps if the candidates use the word, we should be attaching the word to their actions for change in the past.

One that jumps out at me is how hillary changed healthcare. She moved the health insurance accountants into the forefront of decision making for health care. Since she changed health care it costs more and produces less for the consumer while making much, much, much more for the insurance and HMO industry.

I am an Edwards fan myself, and I see him spending years making change for many people who were injured by the neglect and carelessness of corporations or professionals by making the corporations and professionals acknowledge the injury and compensate for the injury.

And while we are talking about change, I think people can be honed by life experiences and their humanity expanded.

[bemildred]

3. Hi Nannah.

:hi:

Blathering about change means nothing at all. It is just hot air. Unless they are willing to talk about what kind of change, specific enough to piss off parties that are happy with things just the way they are, they are just blowing smoke and they are committed to nothing.

I am fascinated by the way people want to BELIEVE in their politicians, like they are some sort of demi-gods or articles of dogmatic faith. When anybody that pays the slightest attention to what is actually done knows that politicians lie like rugs, all the time, it's their primary job skill.

I like Edwards too. I am not committed to anyone as yet, but he is on my short list.

[nannah]

4. life is never static; living is a continual process of changing.

Change is a given, so to promise it would be like promising that we'll have weather. As you have said, it is the nature of the change promised and the details and steps to be taken. And we also have people's history as being effective agents of change. Sometimes we set in motion change that ends badly; we may distance ourselves from the outcome, but we still must acknowledge our failure as an agent of change.

Look to the specifics of written proposals. Kucinich, Obama, Clinton, and Edwards have all spelled out their health care plans. They have all written their plans and expectations for Iraq and defined the focus of their economic policy. How will they implement their plans? What alliances have they formed as represented by their economic support? What are economists saying about their plans? Are your interests reflected in their plans?

Then I ask, who speaks a truth that I recognize and support? Do their actions support their words? Do they have a record of accomplishing what they said they wanted to accomplish?

[balantz]

5. I don't want change.

I'll vote for the guy I think will work on giving us back the whole dollar.

[Daveparts]

6. Not Change but What Change?

Hitler brought change to the German people and like wise Pol Pot.
Even George Bush has brought change. We have devolved from a political contest to a media contest, euphemism's,code words and phrases such as no options are off the table. Completely deflating the meaning of any thing the candidates might say. The word change is case in point,

The American electorate identified the war in Iraq as its number one concern, yet the democratic candidates currently in the lead stand for the least change in that policy, more a modification than an actual change at all.
1984's less is more.

Dick Nixon must be spinning in his grave over the wholesale adoption of his favorite catch phrase, "Let me say this about that," Which meant he wasn't going to answer the question at all but just change the subject.

Health care was the number two concern, Again, the democratic front runners adopt the corporate friendly policy that has caused the health care mess we find ourselves in now. Hillary's ludicrous plan to force Americans to buy health insurance has a let them eat cake ring to it.
They can't afford it!

It makes as much sense as telling the starving refugee's in Darfur to buy a plane ticket to Paris where the cooking is good.But the insurance industry executives have a warm bulge in their pants for her daring proposal.

The American economy is on the brink of total collapse and Hillary yells 70 billion dollar stimulus package! It is as if someone yells fire and she yells water! What water? Where water? A band aid for a cancer patient
or maybe a dog bisket for the hungry Wall Street carnivores.

We have hollowed out the American economy, by destroying the middle class. Citi bank is carrying its begging bowl to China, Bank of America is buying Countrywide mortgage because they have no other choice.They hope and pray that they can find the bottom before the bottom finds them.

We need change, a big change, a revolutionary change and a new understanding of just what treason is.

[Demeter]

7. There Are Only 2 Candidates Specifying Change: Edwards and Kucinich

and as he has the greatest appeal to the general voting public, I support Edwards.

[Triana]

8. Clinton and Obama offer the seduction of change-Edwards offers REAL change...

...where it needs to happen. But that's not 'sexy' I guess.

Pffft.

[eridani]

9. "Hope" is the other empty word

Change TO WHAT? Hope FOR WHAT? Inquiring minds want to know.

[bemildred]

10. Yeah, politicians love empty words. nt

[balantz]

11. I don't hear much substance behind the word "Hope" when it is used lately.

It also sounds negative and dreary to me, like some distant water hole that might be over the next hill when you are dying of thirst in the desert. Maybe I don't like it because it rhymes with words like: Dope; Grope; Cope; Mope; Nope; Soap; G.O.P; Rope. None of these words really make me feel uplifted.

[rAVES]

12. if the top tier candidates actually meant real change, they would not be top tier..

So yea, "change" is meaningless from the likes of Hillary, Obama and Heck, even Edwards mild form of change is costing him dear in the race...

Its hopeless against these people... they have to much money, to much power and they are literally an unstoppable force with the majority of US citizens constantly voting against their own interests.

Wake up... smell the coffee.. with all the votes going to the corporate picked candidates, nothing will ever EVER change.