pageok
pageok
pageok
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes:
Make sure you keep watching:

wt (www):
Once you've seen the Bush-Blair Endless Love video, everything pales in comparison.
1.24.2008 5:07pm
pluribus:
I heard the screen and TV writers were on the strike. The political writers too? If change were copyrighted, everybody would be suing everybody else. And they would probably recover.
1.24.2008 5:25pm
Hoosier:
'Turn and face the strange . . . '

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G980aLrAwoM

" . . . Ch-ch-ch Changes"

Or just change?

http://snltranscripts.jt.org/88/88achangebank1.phtml
1.24.2008 5:29pm
therut:
FAscinating. Just shows how gulliable the human being is to marketing and not sound thinking. Or how media is good propaganda. Talk about herd mentality.
1.24.2008 5:46pm
Morat20 (mail):
I've noticed an interesting tidbit out of political reporting -- reporters are assigned to a single candidate, generally for the whole cycle. Which means they hear the stump speech, day-in and day-out. That breeds a certain...boredom...that seems to find it's way out in their writing. ("I'm sick of talking about the thing the candidate says in every freaking speech. Why won't he change his speech? I'm bored. Let's talk about his hair, or his obsession with 9/11, or his manly scent, or something else").

This video reminded me of that. Most voters don't really follow the candidates as often. Few so much as see a single speech -- and god knows, with the pitiful state of news and political reporting these days, repetition is about the only way to get your message out.

So I try not to give candidates crap for repeating themselves -- whether it's Guiliani's "9/11" or Edwards "Son of a Mill Worker" schtick, in the end most people only hear it once. That's why they repeat it so often.

I think at least some of the craptacular media reporting would clear up if they stopped following the candidates from stump to stump speech. I'm sure Romney, Clinton, and Obama are all equally sick of their own speechs by now -- they're just not being paid to find "new angles" every day on what is, essentially, a total repeat of yesterday.
1.24.2008 5:51pm
ChrisIowa (mail):
Pocket change, or diaper change?
1.24.2008 6:03pm
sojourner (mail) (www):
In the same vein:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXnO_FxmHes
1.24.2008 6:12pm
PabloF:
That's fun, but someone has waaay too much time on their hands....
1.24.2008 6:15pm
drewsil (mail):
I agree with the argument that politicians need to repeat themselves to get their message out. On the other hand if every single politician in the race has the same "message" I'm not sure how informative the continued repetition is. This seems much more politicians attempting to lay claim to a word that tests well in focus groups.

As for the video itself I enjoyed the change from political statement to musical politics, very nicely done.
1.24.2008 6:53pm
r78:
Looks like there is pretty much universal agreement that the Chimp's presidency has been a disaster.

Time for change indeed.
1.24.2008 7:55pm
Maureen001 (mail):
I forget. Which poll said voters want change, now?
1.24.2008 8:10pm
Duffy Pratt (mail):
I'd vote for Bowie, if he were dumb enough to run, a natural American citizen, and didn't have a title.
1.24.2008 8:23pm
Syd Henderson (mail):
If I am elected, I promise a chicken in every pot and a change machine on every corner.
1.24.2008 9:55pm
Minnesota Reader:
This is eerily similar to an earlier to a piece done by the BBC a few years ago (clip). I'll be charitable and suggest it was an homage....
1.24.2008 10:13pm
ScottS (mail):
Sorry VC but this is old news. Still funny on the 4th view.
1.25.2008 12:46am
Dirty Thirty-First:
Does this mean they all support climate change?
1.25.2008 1:23am
Dave N (mail):
I think they should all bank here.
1.25.2008 2:33am