Just Sayin': Transparency Hijacked

This is the first post in what I am planning to be a weekly series that I am calling "Just Sayin'"—if you have topics that you would like to see, let me know and I might write about them!

Transparency, transparency, transparency ... you know "they" say if you say a word over and over again it will lose it's meaning. Recently, the words "transparency" and "transparent" have lost their meaning for me, not because I am repeating them over and over, but because politicians have hijacked them and keep telling us over and over how they are conducting the country's business with "transparency."

Webster defines "transparent" as "clear enough to be seen through, readily understood, or easily detected." You may argue that "clear enough to be seen through" still has meaning ... if you are talking about an object like a piece of sheer cloth, but I have trouble these days with reconciling those meanings to the politicians that keep using the words like they're some "magic pill" that will make the public renew their trust in our government. It seems to me if one has to keep reminding people that one is being transparent, one might recognize the irony of it all—remember that pesky third definition: "easily detected"?? If one is so transparent, transparency by definition should be easy for others to detect—shouldn't it?

It's a shame really. I used to like the word "transparency." It used to mean something when you said someone is "transparent," but I'm afraid those days are gone ... at least for me. Lately I have stopped using any form of the word altogether, preferring instead to use words like authentic, honesty, integrity, genuine, or simply—real. I sure hope our politicians don't start substituting those!!

We need to take back the word and restore it's meaning, or we are going to have start to saying things like, "Oh yeah, I know her. She's really transparent ... no really!"

Am I right or wrong about this? What do you think?