GOTV - Don't Be Sorry

A comment comment by internationaljock mentioned a website-turned-book called sorry everybody (http://sorryeverybody.com/).  As I followed and started looking at scores of pictures of people young and old (mostly old) moved to apologize to the world for what their country had done -- who they had elected in 2004 -- I vividly recalled the grief that I felt at that time.

It occurs to me that we may do the democrats a favor, and energize a new group of young voters, by widely publicizing these images.

The pictures are personal and touching.  The very idea that people could feel such shame is a powerful invocation about what is at stake.  The past 4 years have shown that these normal people were right.  They knew how badly things were going to go.

This screams out, to me at least, go get involved.  

I wonder if the images conjure the same emotion in you.  

The election is bound to take many turns between now and the final count and democrats traditionally benefit from large turnout, particularly from young people.  Perhaps we should be dropping this book off at campuses like Gideon Bibles.

Please, take a look at the site, then take the poll.  Please don't be irritated if I haven't clearly defined or communicated the appropriate emotion.  It's a bit of a stretch for me.

•  voted for sorrow and empathy, but

  What it really brought to mind was a kind of sorrow and joy .... because I well remember the night I found that site. I think there were about 1200 pictures on it at the time. And they made me laugh and cry and not feel so bereft.

  My picture is up there somewhere, as are those of many of my friends. Because after seeing it happening, it was impossible not to want to be a part of that apology to the world.

  by kainah on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 06:48:39 PM PDT

  •  I'm just sorry I missed it

    I remember feeling angry and despondent.  I wonder if I had found that site then, I would have felt better.  It would have been good to look in the faces of others who were upset.

    by EngProf on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 06:51:11 PM PDT

    •  it really was

      I remember that night so well. And I just mentioned it to my husband -- who is a political junkie mainly because he lives with me :) -- and he remembered it immediately. It made me feel 1000% better the night I found it. Made me feel ready again for the fight ahead.

      I never knew there was a book about it -- and a CD available through iTunes -- although it appears it has been out for a while. Thanks for letting me know.

      by kainah on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 06:56:10 PM PDT

•  Stunned and bewildered

  It just all happened so fast. Great diary. Please put up a tip jar if you're feeling froggy. :)

  by Psychotronicman on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 06:53:34 PM PDT

  •  A tip jar

    Thank you.  

    .........ribbit

    by EngProf on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 06:59:55 PM PDT

•  Don't wallow in sorrow. Get mad!

  Let it go.  Focus on now, on what we can change right now.  We're in a struggle not only for the White House, but for the very soul of our Democratic party.

  Do you really think things would have been so different had put a standard-issue Democrat in office in 2004?  In 2006, we picked a Dem Congress in a mandate landslide election, and look at how little that accomplished.

  I have hope for America because I see the chance to bring real change to the Democratic party and to America.

  by DemsUnited on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 06:54:47 PM PDT

  •  History and emotion have power

    I agree with you.  I don't suggest that we wallow in the past.

    I propose that we use the memory of what happened before to motivate people to act now.  I wonder if people, confronted with images of how people felt then, would be moved to act now.

    Perhaps by showing young people the result of their failure to vote, they will vote.  It is risky, though, because they may perceive that sticking their neck out is a risk and could lead to this negative outcome of feeling remorse after the election.

    The images, coupled with empowering words of "you can do it" may be a potent cocktail.

    by EngProf on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:04:39 PM PDT

  •  Uh, not quite

    I personally think that things would have been a hell of a lot different under Kerry. Our soldiers would be home by now for one.

    As for the constant barrage of spite thrown at our (slim) Democratic congress: Bush vetoes one bill before they retake the majority-now he vetoes all of their bills except ones attached to his war money. Historic number of filibusters defeating bill passage in congress.

    I agree, stay angry. But also carry your sorrow with you so that we never forget how close we came to having a real Nazi Germany style melt-down in this country.

    by Psychotronicman on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:11:16 PM PDT

•  that site

  and this one were both a sorrow and a comfort during that dark time. I'll never forget how excited we were doing those last GOTV calls at a lawyers office because all the Dem HQ phones were busy, CNN playing in the background, just knowing we were going to win. Ach.

  The photos on Apologies Accepted were very comforting too--not absolution for our failure to oust BushCo, but more the feeling of people around the world standing shoulder to shoulder with us, saying, "Don't give up the fight."

  by eleanora on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:08:16 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for the link!

    How gratifying to see that the message was received.

    I'm just amazed at the creative and wonderful ways that the internet can help bring people together.

    Contrasting the note from folks in Singapore who wish they could vote for their leader with the note from somewhere else pointing out the number of Americans who didn't bother to vote really makes me think.

    We need to get more people to vote.

    I feel like if people were engaged and thinking about politics a little more, we wouldn't have the self serving, superficial garbage that we are so often stuck with.

    Maybe politicians would quit treating us like children.

    by EngProf on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:16:12 PM PDT

•  Looked through it to see if anyone

  in uniform or a veteran was on it ....
    Saw one specialst 4th class named Nicki ....
    And another holding a sign that said:
     "Even vets know when it's gone too far ..... U S M C

    Because the presence of vets seemed rare in the photos I saw, these voices seemed to speak the louder ....

  by jfdunphy on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:11:14 PM PDT

  •  I think soldiers are constrained

    I'm not positive, but I think that soldiers are strongly discouraged from wearing their uniforms and participating in any sort of political communication.  

    I think that as outrage has grown, more and more communication is coming from the armed forces, but I believe that soldiers who choose to do this risk real possibility of legal retaliation.  

    And speaking frankly, I think it is wise to separate the military from politics.  Let the soldiers speak out as citizens, but when they wear their uniform, let them never doubt that they are there to follow orders and serve.  (There are limits, of course.)

    Still, the folks on the front lines are the ones the populus is supposed to protect.  I think in the middle ages kings often got in trouble because they liked to fight wars more often than the peasants did.  I think democracy is an outgrowth of that conflict.

    by EngProf on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:24:42 PM PDT

    •  Let's not forget that at Nuremburg

      soldiers in uniform were tried for carrying out illegal orders .....  The rules you refer to were designed to protect the democracy from the threat of military rule by tyrants ..... once you have a tyrant in a ruling position, you've come full circle to the Nuremburg rules situation .....

      by jfdunphy on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:30:45 PM PDT

      •  I don't know much about the rules

        I recall that soldiers can refuse an order that violates certain principles (could it be the 'out dated' Geneva convention?).  I imagine that they are carefully trained to understand the legal limits that the commanding officer has over them, but these limits are broad -- of necessity.  You don't want too much thinking on a battle field, mostly you want action.

        The system controls have to be high up in the chain, like the popular election of a politician who is the commander in chief.  The problems begin when the commander in chief doesn't follow the rules or listen to the people.

        But I'm not sure I understand how a soldier decides when things have gone to far.  From what I've read, war is hell.  It would be difficult to trust a consistent moral compass in that environment.

        by EngProf on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:41:27 PM PDT

        •  It covered in the Uniform Code of Military

          Justice, and circumstances can get fuzzy in war, as the movies The Caine Mutiny and Catch-22 illustrate. But being asked to participate in torture and genocide is hardly hazy. Full circle to the Geneva Conventions.  
              You've said a mouthful when you said the commander in chief didn't follow the rules. The check and balances didn't follow the rules either--Congress, the Judiciary, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, etc. What we have here is a massive breakdown of the system. Failure to impose Nuremburg penalties would constitute a complete breakdown of law and order. We are almost there....

          by jfdunphy on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 05:46:50 PM PDT