Country First?
 

I see tonight at the RNC that a popular sign and slogan is "Country First".

What is its orgin? What does it mean exactly? Is it a response to a Democratic party slogan or some perceived weakness?

If McCain is putting Country First, what instead is Obama putting first? What comes second?

I guess it rallies around patriotism, but also perhaps about rural vs city (reg'lar folk vs elites)?

Can someone explain this part of the GOP's pitch to a humble Canadian scratching his head on the sidelines?

It's an appeal to the vestigial America First votes.

But seriously, the implication is that the other side doesn't put "America" first, that coloured folks & Jews will come first. It's a slogan Jesse Helms would have liked.

I think it is referring to the statement McCain made that he would rather lose an election than to lose a war. I might be off on that a little (not intentional). That may mean he knows the war has become unpopular, but he is willing to lose that aspect and proceed. Or . . . I could be totally off.

In the words of Sara Palin: One candidate uses "Change" to promote their career, one will use their career to promote change". Its as simple as that. With all respect, our neighbors to the north should not get a napoleon complex over this. Its a matter of what motivates ones decisions.

Patriotism is an interesting thing. We're all taught from a young age that patriotism is good, but like anything else it can be good or bad. The good is loyalty to one's own, the bad is nationalism.

When I fight to improve our country, I do so because I believe that the US, my home, has incredible potential. The Declaration of Independence was a cry for a better tomorrow, detailing ideals that were etched into the Constitution and our minds: freedom, liberty, justice, equality, fairness and truth. A nation founded on these ideals is something worth fighting for. It's worthy of loyalty.

On the flip-side, there are situations where patriotism is turned into nationalism. When devotion to one's country becomes unquestioning, placing the state above all other concerns, patriotism becomes dangerous. These are often situations where the nation-state abandons the ideals listed above to pursue more personal, selfish gains. Supporting the nation-state unquestioningly means that the nation-state can abuse this unwavering trust, to possibly tragic results.

Which one do you think Palin is?

It's just another of the many empty phrases tossed around the RNC.

Am I the only one who cringed during Palin's speech when she stated her support for offshore drilling and the crowd chanted:

DRILL BABY DRILL!!

ughh.

Actually Rudie Giuliani was going off about supporting the Jews tonight at the RNC.

Interesting takes.
I actually took in as a reference to Monday's postponment of the RNC ceremonies, due to Gustav staring down the Gulf Coast. Alluding to McCain's statement of taking off his Republican hat and putting on his American hat, in order to take care of priorities. But, if that is the case, then they sure had those placards printed up in an awfully big hurry. ;)

The GOP thinks they own patriotism. It's just jingoistic nonsense

Oh, it's way worse than that. They've stolen and co-opted patriotism to use as a divisive campaign-winning and policy-pushing tactic.

The extent to which the "Obama Secret Muslim No Flag Pin God Damn America Wipes his Ass with Old Glory" meme has spread speaks to how well it has worked. Within certain demographies, it's almost completely bought into, and those groups are noisy, but are far from representing America at large.

don't forget, Michelle Obama was never proud to be an American before 2008 :shakehead:

I think this is an example of what roachboy was talking about elsewhere... the RNC speaking to those who are part of their "base". The question is, how well do these memes play outside that base?

I think it means something along the lines of what Saint JFK said; ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.

I see it as the Democratic base wants to know what are you going to give me when your elected, more money for?

It means what it means: Country first. Putting the country's needs ahead of party needs etc. It;s a slogan like, "Change You Can Believe In". Both are just as empty or meaningful as you perceive them to be. Look at the responses on this thread and you can get a sense to the extreme biases here.
-----Added 4/9/2008 at 09 : 45 : 14-----
Not well at all unless they can expand and articulate what they mean with regards to their slogans.

EX: "Change We Can Believe In"
Obama in his speech went on and outlined his beliefs, policies, ideas, and intentions to let us know what he meant by "Change". As an outsider not part of the base, I felt he spoke well and was inclusive of all Americans. I understood what he meant by change and agreed with some of the points. From a speech perspective, I feel it was successful.

EX: "Country First"
So far, based on the speeches I have heard, I don't feel included at all. In fact, I feel like the RNC was FUBU: For Us By Us. I heard no attempts to reach me, the undecided swing voter. I heard no talk about the economy, healthcare, education etc. Country first was not explained very well (to me at least). It has been more praise for each other and no real substance regarding action. In fact, it's completely opposite to "Change". In my opinion, that is a horrible strategy.
-----Added 4/9/2008 at 09 : 48 : 09-----
I thought of a better way to put it: One is preaching to the choir, the other is preaching to the masses.

Jorge... an interesting take. Thanks.

I think these conventions are a great lesson in marketing (after all that is what they are doing... marketing their tickets). If you come up with a catch phrase but don't have any substance behind it... you have (as they say) all sizzle and no steak. Of course, this is all about optics. I don't mean to imply one way or the other if there is any real steak here just that there is a solid impression of steak.

We can't and won't know about the reality of the steak until we purchase it.

I think that's well put, jorgelito.

A slogan is fundamentally a feel-good proposition, and it can work well until it doesn't.

I experience being excluded by the very slogan "Country First". I disagree sharply with McCain on policy issues, so clearly according to the slogan I DON'T put "Country First". Again, patriotism is being used as a wedge, and in this case I'm on the outside.

Thanks everybody!

I often get hung up on lanuguage and can't help deconstructing words and looking for double meanings.

I'm reminded of the Toby Keith song This Is My Town. On the surface it's just a tribute to his town, but then, who's town isn't it?

Perhaps I overanalyze.

Regarding the "Country First" slogan, today on ABC prime time news, they imagined four "main goals" that McCain was trying to express during the convention. The first was literally "Country Vs. Ambition" so I think this is the root of the slogan.

Based on ABC's elaboration, the meme is that Obama is not in this for the country but for his career. I believe Palin even alluded to this directly in her speech last night. It seems like a weak argument tp me but there you go.

How strange that ambition isn't considered an admirable trait in a leader.

As if *any* leadership candidate isn't in the race because they are ambitious. Ambition is what got them to this level of politics.

Isn't spin wonderful?

Have you followed the conventions? There's a wealth of information to be gleaned there. In addition to marketing to the base, I felt it was a great opportunity to market to the rest of us. Kind of like an information seminar or something. Man, it's kind of a sketchy proposition to but the steak first without being able to determine if it is indeed, steak.

Thank you Rat for your kind words. It's interesting how "Country First" can be interpreted in so many different way. Did you hear Lieberman: Country first, party second (paraphrase)? In any case, I feel the Republicans have failed to "back up" their slogan regardless of meaning. What do you think of Obama's "Change"?

And of course they had Lieberman say that. Out of anyone else's mouth it would have sounded like, "See? Our party's better than theirs! We put country first and party second! The other party doesn't do that! They put party first! What a bad party! Vote for our party!" But Lieberman, being (nominally) not a Republican, can NEARLY get away with it. Except, of course, for the platform he's speaking from and why he's on TV in the first place...

I don't know... I really connected with his "hope" message from early in the primaries. "Change" as a slogan doesn't really do much for me. Certainly "Change You can Believe In" leaves me a bit cold, because it's so transparent what they want me to do: believe. It's strangely phrased, I think. It's not like I've been over here just waiting and hoping that someday some change will come along that I can believe in. I'm WAITING TO BELIEVE!!! I'M SICK OF CHANGE I CAN'T BELIEVE IN!! I don't know, it sort of strikes me funny.

Fortunately for Obama, his policies are much more in line with what I believe is the best course for our country, so his slogan can be iffy and he can still have my vote.

Does this mean they put the country ahead of God? *Shock* What are the fundies going to say about that?



*crickets*
*crickets*

"Country" is apparently the word some consultant traded for a trash bag of ducats that would be most likely to trigger the desired response in the Republican base. "Country music" "God and Country" "Country Living" "Country First" associations purportedly twitter the heart of right-leaning voters on the fence. Too bad Toby Kieth already put in his support for Obama.

Here is the cloud tag for McCain's speech:
http://politicalmaps.org/wp-content/...-tag-cloud.gif

Palin's speech looks pretty similar.

country first
america first is an obvious echo. i'm a bit surprised that the republicans would go rummaging about in the bag of old-school jingoism because typically they've been pretty adept at repackaging jingoism so it appears to be identity.

it's also obvious a wedge-political meme: link it to the recurrent persecution motif in the context of which the rightwing Everyperson is endlessly put upon by an Evil Coastal or Urban elite. this plays to evangelicals' sense--which is staged discursively in bible and other novels---that they are a small set-upon community of the Righteous chosen by god to carry out important missions in babylon (a term they do not use--i like to this that follows from the fact that it echoes rastafarian political language and so is a contaminant).

oddly (or not) this imagery of Victimization which overrides Context is the center of mc-cain's autobiography as reprocessed into a campaign narrative. so if you want to play the allegory game, mc-cain the prisoner is the republican base under george w bush...no wait, that doesn't work does it? mc-cain the hero who endures Torture is the ultimate victim, and his situation as presidential candidate the triumph of the Victim, and so is itself an echo of the Redemption Narrative behind the far-right-faithful-as-victim-of-babylon narrative.

what is surreal, not only in this instance, but in the republican campaign more generally, is the extent to which this meme-structure positions the faithful--you'd think the past 8 years have not been republican-controlled. you'd think the bush administration from another dimension.

in a context of endless repetition, what is repeated comes to shape the past in the image of itself. in a context of endless repetition, the far right was never in power, remains a minority, is not an organized political machine--the biggest and most powerfully organized political machine to emerge over the past 30 years. instead, they are staged as a small, isolated band of the righteous out there in ruralia. only what is repeated is real.