Since the Iowa caucus results seemed to show that the country wants "change", we've been bombarded by that theme all weekend.

Obama and Huckabee placed first and now they are playing the "change" card.

The speech Obama gave on Thursday night was arguably the best and most energetic American speech of this generation. But once the emotion died down, and the campaigns moved on to New Hampshire, all we're left with are good feelings and vague ideas.

The politicians have jumped all over the "change" theme: Clinton, Romney and Edwards are now professing to be agents of change.

Meanwhile, the lazy American electorate is just sleepwalking again, like it does every 4 years, with the candidates who most charismatically talk about change and "uniting us not dividing us" while their positions remain either partisan or vague.

Imagine an Obama/Huckabee debate in October: Obama's anti-war/Huckabee's pro-war; one wants amnesty for illegals, the other doesn't; one wants a more universal healthcare approach that he can't explain how to afford while the other says he wants more tax cuts. Both pay lip service to the environment, but aren't really passionate about the cause. Obama is pro-choice; Huckabee's pro-life.

Another partisan campaign, with partisan attacks by two candidates who have nothing to say about the purpose of gov't, fiscal restraint, reforms on our Middle East policy, invalidating the Patriot Act, and the list goes on and on.

"Change" is just a word I've heard these people say over and over.

There is a buried subtext here: Americans don't really want changes of policy; they want a new set of leaders who they haven't seen so much. The electorate is easily lead by emotion while they never stop and think things through. Americans are like teenaged girls that way: in love with the "new", and then they get bored real fast and move on to the next one who projects confidence and seems "different", but then they dump that one too. Notice how Bush got elected in 2004 and his job approval went from 52% in January '05 to about 35% in less than a few months? People woke up fast but woke up too late to the status quo leadership of a divider who had promised to unite us.

If you like one of these change candidates other than Ron Paul, educate me; what will they do to really change anything?

It's hard to be a uniter when the other side wants to destroy you from day one. Think about that. He made the promise thinking that the Democrats actually were interested in helping rather then screwing everything up. He soon found out that the opposition was and still is only interested in getting their power back at all costs.

The political tactic of calling for change is nothing new. The person in office asks for another 4 years and the person who wants his job calls for change. Now that nobody is running that is in currently in the position.....they all are calling for change. If it means changing from what we have now to what we had under Jimmy Carter, I would rather stick with what we have.

It's amazing listening to people that never lived outside of the US complaining about how terrible it is here. I've lived a large portion of my life in other countries and let me tell you, many of us have no idea how good we have it here. But the only way you can find that out is by actually leaving the US and you'll find out that most of the trashing these candidates have been doing to us is all BS. We have been convinced that we are in dire-straits. This premise is quite funny. But as I said before, this is politics as usual.

__________________


"These two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis,"

"The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies,

the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." - Rep. Barney Frank (D)

I don't disagree that many people in the United States have it very well. That being said, it seems as though you're suggesting that, because things are going so well, we shouldn't bother to try and make changes for the better. Visit a city like East St. Louis and try to legitimately argue that society doesn't need to take extreme strides to help improve impoverished communities. Many, many people are in "dire-straits." It may not be Sudan/Somalia-type poverty, but it's industrialized poverty and it isn't pretty.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

Seems like a very cynical and oversimplified take on what's happening.

I don't think my fellow Americans are being duped or fooled by the candidates. Campaign promises are not often met and peeople are wary of that. We are currently under a president who appeared to be an agent for positive change in 2000... In 2004 we re-elected him out of fear.

We misjudged Bush's character, judgement, and ability to lead. He surrounded himself by, and was unduly influenced by theocrats, and the delusional neocons.

What we are looking for now is a man (or woman I guess) that really does have good character along with good judgement... a person who will work to get things done in a bipartisan way instead of contribute to the partisanship.

We do want change... we do want a functional government. It's for real.

The candidates that professed their vast experience with this dysfunctional government are getting swept aside. On the other hand, what we really want is stability and things to work the way they should work..we want bills to actually get passed and foreign policy that makes us look good instead of giving us black eyes. That's the change. It's not radical change, but it's change from the status quo. Changing things, not in a dreamy way, just in a practical one. We want to restore the greatness of America that was partially lost in a short 8 years.

__________________


Screw Change!! Let's have a Seamless Transition of Power and Policy.. John McSame in 2008!

Change will be all there is left in the pockets of small business if Obama takes office.

__________________
Are you a spineless slave to political correctness?

The whole "change" thing is just a platitude that tickles the ears of the government school-educated. I'm not saying Obama hasn't outlined specific plans, but just saying "I'm for change" isn't enough. The white supremisists, communist party, Minutement, etc, etc are all for "change" too.

__________________
-Eric

"For whoever habitually suppresses the truth in the interests of tact will produce a deformity from the womb of his thought." -Sir Basil H. Liddel-Hart

Self-composed.com

government school educated? Is that a yardstick for cognitive ability?

Change is a pretty popular buzzword when things are broken... and for good reason. I think the intellectually challenged parties are those who do not realize that change is what's needed for our government.

Obama's for transparency, accountability, and bridging the rift between the dems and repubs of our congress so that things can be done. All things that do not exist in the current state of government.....so what to do? Change it.

That should have been the battlecry of all the candidates.....now they're all recognizing that they lacked the foresight.... just like they all did on the Iraq War.

By the way, why the hell does the Hawaii flag contain the "Union Jack"?

__________________


Screw Change!! Let's have a Seamless Transition of Power and Policy.. John McSame in 2008!

No, but its too often a good indicator of how likely someone is to employ their cognative ability.

Change to what? Anarchy? Nazism? Fascism? Communism? Pacifism? Nuke everyone? Double taxes for everyone? Get rid of the IRS?

Calling for change is just a platitude, but I'll accept "bussword" too.

More platitudes. Nice sounding platitudes. But platitudes.

__________________
-Eric

"For whoever habitually suppresses the truth in the interests of tact will produce a deformity from the womb of his thought." -Sir Basil H. Liddel-Hart

Self-composed.com

Well then, you must discount my degree out of hand since it's from the University of Illinois... I think it would be interesting to see a large employer make such a distinction and select only people from private schools.

I also think it's interesting that a huge contingent of Bush's administration were from private schools... and I would question how well they "employed their cognitive abilities".

Um... yeah. He's clearly stated that he wants to change our nation to all of the above.

It's just a slogan, buzzword or platitude. Bush's was "Yes America Can"...Post other candidates campaign slogans and I would say they're just as meaningless at face value.

But Obama does say what how he wants to change government. But only those who listen or care to read about it will get the details.... just like vetting any other candidate.

__________________


Screw Change!! Let's have a Seamless Transition of Power and Policy.. John McSame in 2008!

Miss the point much?

__________________
-Eric

"For whoever habitually suppresses the truth in the interests of tact will produce a deformity from the womb of his thought." -Sir Basil H. Liddel-Hart

Self-composed.com

I only read your words, not your mind.

If your whole point was only that "change for the sake of change is not necessarily a good thing", then my only response is "No Shit"!?


But you seemed to imply that Obama's audience are government-schooled (which means not too smart) sheep who are mindlessly buying his campaign slogan at face value.

Since that's kind of an indirect shot at me as I am government educated, I took exception to that. I also think it's an obtuse assessment of Obama's following.

So, please explain what your point was exactly? A very un-profound caveat? or a shot at Obama, his following, and anyone who's government schooled?

__________________


Screw Change!! Let's have a Seamless Transition of Power and Policy.. John McSame in 2008!

lol...I think it has something to do with Cook and the brits as friends and I think original founders of the island....etc...

__________________
Obama-e fungis nati homines....

If anyone buys the "change" message, they are severely impaired. The only change Obama will offer is higher taxes that will get passed down to the consumer -- the very people it's supposed to help.

__________________
"I miss the days when they made toys that could kill a kid."
- Jerry Seinfeld

He's not telling outlining what he plans to do. You said he is for a more transparent government. How, precisely, is he going to accomplish this? Is he going to do something about earmarks added to spending bills? Is there going to be live telecast of every meeting he holds? What is he going to do to make governemnt transparent?

__________________
-Eric

"For whoever habitually suppresses the truth in the interests of tact will produce a deformity from the womb of his thought." -Sir Basil H. Liddel-Hart

Self-composed.com

Barack Obama | Change We Can Believe In | Ethics

Shine the Light on Washington Lobbying

Centralize Ethics and Lobbying Information for Voters: Obama will create a centralized Internet database of lobbying reports, ethics records, and campaign finance filings in a searchable, sortable and downloadable format.

Require Independent Monitoring of Lobbying Laws and Ethics Rules: Obama will use the power of the presidency to fight for an independent watchdog agency to oversee the investigation of congressional ethics violations so that the public can be assured that ethics complaints will be investigated.

Support Campaign Finance Reform: Obama supports public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests. Obama introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State Senate, and is the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold's (D-WI) tough bill to reform the presidential public financing system.

Shine the Light on Federal Contracts, Tax Breaks and Earmarks

Create a Public “Contracts and Influence” Database: As president, Obama will create a "contracts and influence" database that will disclose how much federal contractors spend on lobbying, and what contracts they are getting and how well they complete them.

Expose Special Interest Tax Breaks to Public Scrutiny: Barack Obama will ensure that any tax breaks for corporate recipients — or tax earmarks — are also publicly available on the Internet in an easily searchable format.

End Abuse of No-Bid Contracts: Barack Obama will end abuse of no-bid contracts by requiring that nearly all contract orders over $25,000 be competitively awarded.

Sunlight Before Signing: Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.

Shine Light on Earmarks and Pork Barrel Spending: Obama's Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act will shed light on all earmarks by disclosing the name of the legislator who asked for each earmark, along with a written justification, 72 hours before they can be approved by the full Senate.

Bring Americans Back into their Government

Hold 21st Century Fireside Chats: Obama will bring democracy and policy directly to the people by requiring his Cabinet officials to have periodic national broadband townhall meetings to discuss issues before their agencies.

Make White House Communications Public: Obama will amend executive orders to ensure that communications about regulatory policymaking between persons outside government and all White House staff are disclosed to the public.

Conduct Regulatory Agency Business in Public: Obama will require his appointees who lead the executive branch departments and rulemaking agencies to conduct the significant business of the agency in public, so that any citizen can see in person or watch on the Internet these debates.
Release Presidential Records: Obama will nullify the Bush attempts to make the timely release of presidential records more difficult.

Free the Executive Branch from Special Interest Influence

Close the Revolving Door on Former and Future Employers: No political appointees in an Obama administration will be permitted to work on regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years. And no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration.

Free Career Officials from the Influence of Politics: Obama will issue an executive order asking all new hires at the agencies to sign a form affirming that no political appointee offered them the job solely on the basis of political affiliation or contribution.

Reform the Political Appointee Process: FEMA Director Michael Brown was not qualified to head the agency, and the result was a disaster for the people of the Gulf Coast. But in an Obama administration, every official will have to rise to the standard of proven excellence in the agency's mission.