If I hear the word "change" again, I am going to mace somebody. Between Barack Obama and John Edwards, I must have heard the word approximately 48,592 times, and don't forget I turned in sparingly. It was already a kind of cliche idea to call oneself the candidate of change, and at this point the word is just starting to lose all meaning. While Edwards and Obama consider themselves candidates of change, but it just isn't true. They'll govern differently from George Bush and they may even be more ethical if they win, but Dennis Kucinich these guys are not. There's no transcript that I can find right now, but here's part of an article that quotes what I'm talking about:
Comparing [Clinton] to the "forces for status quo," Edwards said that Obama "believes deeply in change, and I believe deeply in change. Anytime you speak out for change, this is what happens. The forces for status quo are going to attack."Stop saying change!!!!
Clinton shot back, emphasizing, "Making change is not about what you believe or about making a speech, it's about working hard." Raising her voice, she said, "I want to make change, but I've already made change. I'm not running on a promise of change. But on 35 years of change … we don't need to raise false hopes of people in our country about what can be delivered."
And she almost shouted: "I think that having a first woman president is a huge change."
I really truly wish Facebook wasn't a partial sponsor of this bloviatefest since it makes old media think they're in touch with today's hip youth. Any internet utility that allows my friends to send me two "puff puff pass" invitations, two vampire requests and one zombie invitation in the past few months just isn't a serious tool for political discussion. The Presidential Election group on Facebook is just full of intelligent banter that as of press time (4:09 AM EST) has somehow turned to the genocide of the American Indians. It also leads to news stories where said old media calls Facebook users at home to get their opinions. Here's a sample:
Fuck you Sarah Odell, 20-year-old sophmore at Wellesley college! That you can actually use the phrase "young people" when talking to a major media network and that you can say with a straight face that an ex-Nixon Youth who didn't do any drugs in the 60s represents anything new shows that your future is bright. Provided your future is dried out, desperate political operative for so no name schmuck in the House of Representatives that is. But hey, ABC doesn't just talk to retards who are Democrats!
Sarah Odell, a 20-year-old sophomore at Wellesley College, told ABCNEWS.com in a phone interview that the debate would not change her support for Sen. Hillary Clinton, D- N.Y. She said Clinton most represented the campaign's hottest buzzword — change.
"Change is not just an amorphous buzzword for Clinton," she said. "Young people want change in the deepest sense of the word. If you listened to what she said in the debate, or if you look at her record after serving a full term in the Senate, it's clear she's the most qualified candidate."
A 40-year-old on Facebook? That's just sad. Maybe it's actually Sarah Odell's future self come to the past to vote? I'd bet any amount of money that despite her "anyone but the Democrats" rhetoric, Pamela said that the 2004's "Anybody But Bush" strategy was proof that liberals just hate America and have no principles. Also, her question about fighting the global jihad actually makes it sound like she wants to sign up for it. Sounds to me like we got a sleeper cell agent.
On Facebook's "Soundboard," an electronic bulletin board, Pamela Geller Oshry, in her 40s and from New York, asked "Will any candidate be brave enough to lay out a strategy to fight the global jihad?"
Reached by phone by ABC NEWS.com, Oshry, described Paul's position as "scary and soft on terrorism." She said she was supporting Giuliani, but found former Sen. Fred Thompson's positions "stronger and stronger" and would elect "anyone capable of beating the Democrats."
Facebook being involved with the debate also means that media outlets covering the debate have to mention Ron Paul's continued popularity among the coveted "internet losers" demographic. I may have a blog that I'm updating at 4:30 in the morning, but at least I'm not a tinfoil hat putz who run around the internet posting "Vote for Dr. Ron Paul!" on all of Mike Huckabee's YouTube videos. Ron Paul is the favorite of 37 percent of Republicans on Facebook, an esteemed group composed entirely of people who make sure to correct you when you say "Mr. Paul" or "Representative Paul" as opposed to "Dr. Paul". Paul's insurgency candidacy is far more interesting than Mike Muckabee's, if only because it proves this country has a growing number of pissed off losers with internet access. But that is for another day.
All in all, just another disappointing day at the track. Until a meth crazed Bill Richardson takes hostages then breaks down weeping while talking about his failed professional baseball career, I'm going to keep watching football.