Now that the relentless “change” message has been awarded by a tiny fraction of Iowa voters, I suspect we’ll be seeing that theme more often than “Law and Order” reruns. Sen. Hillary Clinton has already changed her message to change. Now that’s change in action! And if Sen. Barack Obama continues to harp on change – and not just any kind of change, but Real Change – does that mean he’s resistant to change?

Hey, I don’t mind change, as long as it’s in euros, but isn’t that the implicit message of every candidate who isn’t an incumbent? This race has no incumbents and no candidates who want to clone the Bush presidency. So, why was the change offered by Obama and Huckabee more appealing?

This reminds me of the 2000 race when Sen. John McCain ran as the reformer and won the New Hampshire primary. A day later, George W. Bush was the “reformer with results” and voters changed their minds.

Been there. Won’t do that. The other theme in heavy rotation is experience. The candidates who are governors highlight their work in balancing budgets and making executive decisions. The candidates who are in Congress note their efforts on national and international issues. To break free from the pack, candidates must get creative.

Clinton notes that she has lived in the White House, worked on its behalf and been on the inside of presidential decisions. Meanwhile, Bill Richardson, who is a governor and has worked for a president, points out that he is the only candidate who has negotiated with foreign governments, referring to his stint as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

But if voters wanted someone with White House experience who has dealt with foreign governments, they would be bemoaning the fact that President Bush cannot run again.

Better stick to that change message.

Circular reporting. Please tell me that I’m not alone in being annoyed with campaign coverage. It seems every story is run through a “Who Will Win?” filter, and so the national media produce poll numbers, contribution amounts, reviews of ads and insights into the latest strategic tweaking. This superficial style of coverage has been denounced in journalistic circles for decades now, but the well-worn scripts remain.

Speaking of scripts, the media are now reporting on how the “stunning” results in Iowa run to the “inevitability” of a Clinton victory. And who touted her as inevitable? The media.

Some things never change.