The guiding principle of General Semantics is that "The map is not the territory." Maps, like words, are symbolic representations. That is to say, what we call a thing doesn't change that thing. But in politics, the words we use sure do change the perceptions of people and things.

When a word is used too often and too abstractly, it loses all meaning. It can mean anything and also nothing. Liberal and Conservative are perfect examples. They mean so many things, describe so many positions, that they come to mean nothing in the end.

As I have commented twice tonight in other posts, often emotionally charged words, buzz words if you will, fail to convey any real meaning because they over-simplify issues. Howard Dean has taken the position that he favors extending health benefits to same sex partners if you are going to give these same benefits to mixed sex partners. A anti-Dean spokeperson said that they will use the term "favors gay marriages" to describe that position. I understand that all is fair in love, war and politics but I still don't like that.

A while ago, being against abortion was changed to being Pro-life. And being in favor of abortion became Pro-Choice. Now I like life and I like choices. So how do I vote?

In the Sixties (ah, I'm showing my advanced age here) being Liberal was a GOOD thing. So, we had Liberal Republicans and Liberal Democrats, vying for who could be more liberal. Before the political use of liberal all the word meant was "Generous in amount; ample." Give me a liberal amount of food, I'm hungry. Then it came to mean being in opposition to the Vietnam war. Today it can mean a whole list of things and I kind of shy away from it.

Oh, heres a good one. I watched the History Channel coverage of the Alamo. Armed men who went into Mexico to support an early rebellion were called "Filibusters." The word filibuster meant "An adventurer who engages in a private military action in a foreign country." Today it means a long-winded speech intended to delay a vote on a bill. No guys in buckskin with single-shot rifles. (Mores the pity, that would get me to watch political debates. "There's a filibuster and hes going to shoot!")

Before the Civil War being a Democrat meant that you favored States being able to decide if they wanted to allow slavery. I haven't heard Al Sharpton espouse this view, even though he is a Democrat. Democrats back then were against big government, but are now by and large in favor of it. Interestingly enough the guys that founded Texas considered themselves Democrats, but now Texas is a Republican state.

In the Nineteenth century, the model for government efficiency was call a "Bureaucracy." Today that word means just the opposite.

Beware of little words for big ideas. Slogans are bad, thats my slogan. There are two kinds of people in the world: The kind that think that everything is black or white and those of us that know better. A little bit of levity.

So when you define a political candidate with words, as we all do for convenience, think a minute about what those words might really mean.