Blair's gaffe

Posted By Peter Williams Tuesday, March 30, 2010 - 2:57 PM Share

In a speech today at a Labour Party rally held in his old constituency of Sedgefield, former Prime Minister Tony Blair publicly threw his weight behind incumbent Prime Minister Gordon Brown. While some may have been surprised or even amused by Blair's endorsement of Brown, given their strained relationship, what I found most interesting was Blair's description of Conservative Leader David Cameron's campaign slogan "Time for Change" as "the most vacuous [slogan] in politics."

"Time for Change." Sound familiar? The slogan, of course, sounds eerily like Barack Obama's "Change We Can Believe In." But the Tories haven't just cherry-picked a popular catchphrase from the Obama campaign; in addition, they've hired a number of campaign strategists and consultants who've worked with candidate and President Obama, including media-savvy former White House Communications Director Anita Dunn.

What's so risible about Blair's comment is the awkward position in which it puts him: by mocking Cameron's "Time for Change," he also mocks Obama's "Change We Can Believe In." There just really isn't any way to simultaneously skewer "Time for Change" and hold up "Change We Can Believe In" as a paradigm of pith and profundity. Not exactly the nicest way to thank the guy who awarded you "first friend" status, is it?

On the other hand, maybe Blair's comment will throw some cold water on "change" enthusiasts. The change conceit does, after all, make for a vacuous campaign slogan. Given the highly polarized contemporary political atmosphere in the United States and the United Kingdom, to say that electing a president or prime minister from the opposition represents Change is nothing but an empty truism.

Owen Humphreys - WPA Pool/Getty Images

EXPLORE:BRITAIN, POLITICS
 

MAX SITTING

5:14 PM ET

March 30, 2010

awkward position

If Blair cheers up his appearance with some media suave and makes a public apology to Obama for such an egregious gaffe, do you think his awkward position will be alleviated?

 

JT1928

9:23 PM ET

March 30, 2010

Another possibility is that

Blair didn't make a gaffe. Perhaps he intentionally described the change theme as exactly what it is - devoid of substance or meaning. And as hard as it must be to believe, outside the offices of FP, many of us agree.

 

EMBRA

2:32 AM ET

March 31, 2010

Get over yourselves

Not everything relates to the US

 

BLUE13326

12:03 PM ET

March 31, 2010

Well, yeah, isn't it just

Well, yeah, isn't it just truth?

And hasn't Obama's first year+ shown it to be devoid of substance?

Unless change means going back to the 1970s...

 

DKJACK

1:50 PM ET

March 31, 2010

Vacuous comment about a vacuous slogan

So, FP calls it a "gaff," then concludes that it's probably right. Calling Blair an ingrate because there's of a pedantic distinction Obama's "change" and Cameron's "change" is ridiculous.

Obama's "change," regardless of phrasing, was indeed vacuous as a slogan, because at the time it was untested. What makes the Tory's "change" truly vacuous is that we already know what "change" means to them. Change is fundamentally at odds with the very nature of the right. The only "change" the right ever wants is return to the status quo ante.

Compare the change Obama has REALLY effected, and Blair achieved, with the "change" Cameron & Co. offer, and Blair's "gaff" becomes trenchant and wise. Vacuous, they name is Cameron.

 

Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.

Read More