What's Happening?
Aimee Clark

Keep Calm and Carry On

Posted Tuesday, March 23, 2010, at 11:31 PM
View 30 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Excellent blog. In the greater scheme of things, it's amazing how our everyday lives will soldier on in spite of major changes on the macro level.

    -- Posted by AmyPeterson on Wed, Mar 24, 2010, at 6:46 AM
  • Think about socialism for a second. Why does nobody flee to Cuba? I have never heard of a massive immigration to the great USSR. Have you ever seen how people in socialist, communist countries live? The working people are worse off then our homeless. Marxism is based on theft, you steal from the haves to give to the have nots. That sounds moral. Nothing has every provided more to everyone across the board as Free Enterprise. Poor people in this country don't know what suffering is. I love hearing people complain about their situation, just fix it. See you can do that here, or at least you could. In a communist or socialist society everyone is poor, except the few tyrants controlling your life. If you want that, then you are an idiot. You also have the freedom to move to almost any other nation.

    If you are a communist or a socialist please refrain from ever calling yourself an American again, because nothing would be further from the truth.

    -- Posted by DOWNWITHDEMS on Wed, Mar 24, 2010, at 12:34 PM
  • This is exactly what I was talking about. Now I don't even get to call myself an American because some anonymous person on the internet said so :(

    -- Posted by stafinois on Wed, Mar 24, 2010, at 1:20 PM
  • Socialism, Communism, and Liberalism are by definition anti American. You are not an American if you believe in big government entitlement programs. You are not American if you believe in Redistribution of wealth or anything else Karl Marx said. America was founded on self reliance and small government. It was founded on personal freedom and liberty. Government was not able to grant or revoke rights. Try to learn real American history for once, not your Commie/Socialist/PC crap they are feeding our youth today.

    If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its a duck. You are a duck, plain and simple.

    -- Posted by DOWNWITHDEMS on Wed, Mar 24, 2010, at 1:58 PM
  • So because I disagree with your ideology of this country, I am anti-American? Those are some strong words! I personally think that calling anybody anti/un-American is in itself un-American, but that's just the duck quacking.

    Personally, I believe that the United States is about balance, not the far left or the far right. Neither could exist without the other, and I doubt that a form of government in either extreme would survive.

    DWD, I have to admit that it's tough take you very seriously when you hide behind a screen name that is asking for a fight and seem to have no ability to sense jest or sarcasm.

    -- Posted by stafinois on Wed, Mar 24, 2010, at 2:29 PM
  • Keep calm and carry on. Good advice, England! Everyone makes too big of deal out of all this political stuff. Blah, it's for the birds. Live your life and be happy.

    -- Posted by JohnnyMetro on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 12:01 AM
  • "You are not American if you believe in Redistribution of wealth or anything else Karl Marx said. America was founded on self reliance and small government. It was founded on personal freedom and liberty."

    DWD, you contradict yourself. You begin by making a list of what you believe makes one un-American. You then say that America was founded on personal freedom and liberty. So, which is it? Do someone's political beliefs, when they differ from yours, make them un-American? Or does being an American grant us the right to choose which political party to support, which words to use when participating in online forums, etc?

    You could argue that if Aimee were the leader of this country and was foisting all those beliefs on the rest of us, that she were being un-American. However, she's not, and her opinion matters just as much as yours (perhaps more, as Aimee Clark is a real person and DOWNWITHDEMS is an annoying screen name that suggests taking out one of the two major political parties in this nation). Who, exactly, is the un-American one, here?

    -- Posted by notinia on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 6:45 AM
  • A belief in big government and a government that can grant rights is Anti American. Our founders understood that rights come from one place God, not Nancy Pelosi or this retard Obama. Our founders believed in no taxation without representation, well if you believe that those of us paying taxes are being represented you are crazy. Aimee believes that a government should be able to determine freedoms, that is her right, but it is anti American.

    Look at what happens when government gets big. California, New York, New Jersey all bankrupt. In New York they are not going to allow salt in restaurants, that sounds American. What happened to personal freedom? Aimee can think what she wants, the problem is when they act on these idiotic thoughts they people get stripped of their freedoms. Obama had people turning in their neighbors for disagreeing with him, that sounds nothing like America. I think Obama is a Tyrant, a retard, and nothing but street trash. People said things about Bush, he just let it go. Obama wants to take out his opposition.

    Being a socialist/communist is admittedly being against everything America stands for. If you support the destruction of personal freedom, you can't be for freedom. You can't consider yourself an American.

    Twist what I say all you want, call me a hypocrite. I am not the one trying to take away peoples rights. That is the democratic party, it is all that they do. Name one major piece of legislation that the democrats have created that does not strip us of freedom.

    -- Posted by DOWNWITHDEMS on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 8:06 AM
  • "Name one major piece of legislation that the democrats have created that does not strip us of freedom."

    The Civil Rights Act comes to mind.

    -- Posted by stafinois on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 9:59 AM
  • Sorry, DWD, that was a direct quote.

    -- Posted by notinia on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 2:39 PM
  • First off dwd we would be in the same situation if we had a republican in office. And secondly to name call like that and put the blame the way you are is not ethical. Its both political parties that are at fault here. Its very entertaining to hear you say it all one sides fault. At leat Obama didn't choke on a peanut or Biden didn't shoot a campaign contributor in the face. Debating politics is juast like debating religion. There's no way to win the argument you are for. So you and all others as well need to realize that cause its gonna be that. Oh and one other thing. "Can't we all just get along."

    -- Posted by buss22 on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 8:04 PM
  • i like this look on the matter.

    personally, im not sure how anyone is in any place to condemn government actions. we have yet to learn the ramifications of this bill and its law, and perhaps in retrospect it will go the way of the prohibition. for now, however, we must only watch and speak out (with reserve and intelligence) our beliefs. you may say it is your duty, but an intelligent voice at the right moment will do much more than a loud and rude voice anytime.

    -- Posted by zlastone on Fri, Mar 26, 2010, at 6:53 PM
  • I agree with your original blog 100%, and I am about as American as apple pie! DWD is certainly an extremist and is quite rude too. If DWD calls President Obama a retard, I wonder what he called President Bush. The difference in their IQ's is quite evident. Intelligent discourse should be encouraged but DWD's kind of rhetoric is right out of the pages of Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. Both men get paid extremely well for brainwashing.

    -- Posted by jenn711 on Sat, Mar 27, 2010, at 12:42 PM
  • DWD, she doesn't CONSIDER herself a pinko commie, she just assumed nutjobs like you would.

    -- Posted by notinia on Sun, Mar 28, 2010, at 1:30 AM
  • DINGDINGDINGDING!!! Notinia wins!

    Would you like what is behind Door #1 or the lifetime supply of canned ham?

    -- Posted by stafinois on Sun, Mar 28, 2010, at 11:33 AM
  • DWD, by calling Obama, or really anyone, a "retard" your own intelligence is showing.

    -- Posted by AmyPeterson on Sun, Mar 28, 2010, at 4:14 PM
  • I'll freely admit before I get into this article, I'm a liberal. I might even border on being a pinko commie socialist. Maybe you can't read.

    -- Posted by DOWNWITHDEMS on Sun, Mar 28, 2010, at 5:18 PM
  • Nope, I already won, and I can definitely read that. I think Ill take the ham ;)

    -- Posted by notinia on Sun, Mar 28, 2010, at 10:42 PM
  • DWD, you need to work on your ability to sense sarcam and jest before you can winthe canned ham.

    -- Posted by stafinois on Mon, Mar 29, 2010, at 7:38 AM
  • In the country you want everyone is a winner. Every loser will get a reward, people like you have created that culture among our children already. It is only a matter of time before nobody should be able to lose. What a joke. I don't want canned ham, I work hard so I can afford a steak and some lobster. Keep your spam, you are going to need it.

    -- Posted by DOWNWITHDEMS on Mon, Mar 29, 2010, at 9:34 AM
  • Wow, DWD, you seriously need to grow a sense of humor before it is too late.

    -- Posted by notinia on Mon, Mar 29, 2010, at 2:15 PM
  • I thought the original article was very well done. I thought it did a good job of looking objectively and understanding that things are the way they are simply because of the structure of the government.

    I would however like to address an issue that really bugs me in the mainstream. Some people take Marxism to mean that socialism=communism. Look at the differences in definition. Communism is complete government control on manufacturing and allocations of goods. That is it completely removes free market and private ownership. Socialism is a public/worker combined ownership of manufacturing and allocations of goods. I'm studying political science and sociology in college right now and I have to say socialism could take its place. Because of my studies I read about Marx all the time. He did not say that socialism=communism. He said that socialism is simply a step in between Capitalism and Communism. He did say that it TENDS to lead to communism, but they are both very different ideas.

    Another issue that always bugs me is "What the founders wanted..." well what the founders wanted we don't know. It's too hard to actually know what they wanted, the constitution was written too vague. And if you think about it, the founders didn't even know what they wanted. That's why there was the need to change the Articles of Confederation. The constitution was an attempt. They didn't know if it would work for sure, but it was something. And, like today, it was not a complete unanimous decision that the founders didn't want big government. Think back to when you were in school, "Virginia and New Jersey Plans" These were two ideas of what federal government should do. They argued about it as much as we do. Some wanted big govt, some didn't.

    If you look in the constitution, there is nothing about "free market". It is not promised to you. The idea of free market was only implemented with, "big government" restricting monopolies. Socialism can be used while keeping a democracy. It's an economic system, not a political structure system. Besides, can we really expand with out tweaking the way our government is run? The issue was not weather or not the PEOPLE were free from big government, it was about the STATES. Founders weren't upset about individual freedoms, fearful that Britain was controlling every aspect of the colonies' lives. The main issue was they were seeing increases in tax, and they had no representation per colony in British politics. We have that now, do not say you aren't being represented. You live in Iowa, pay attention to the news and you will know that you have the biggest advantage to get involved than most other states. Representatives from Iowa are always involved in almost every big decision made in congress, so vote against your representative. Help who you want to win, win in your district to change who is representing your views. Or an even bigger change would be a push to reform the constitution. let's update it so WE know what WE want today, not what founders intended and wanted.

    Structures of governments have always, and will always change. It's part of life. I can see that, and I think we need to stop relying on a structure from 200 years ago. I'm not talking a complete makeover, just some changes. The reason we have arguments about fed involvement is because our basis of government is not clear on what our feds can and can't do. Our government is now functioning on a piece of paper that has barely evolved. Minus the amendment, our structure still says that every "slave" is counted in population as 3/5. Let's re-write, do we need 200 year old ideas like that still written in.

    The idea we are heading on a communist path is a complete lie and BS. The structure of the government itself, not the involvement of, is a common believe that people have the choice. We are formed on a republic, representation, not a direct democracy, people decide everything. In a sense, you could look at this and say that our government has always been socialist.

    -- Posted by hawk_student on Fri, Apr 2, 2010, at 1:07 PM
  • I suggest that you try to get a non leftist view and stop idealizing professors who can't make it in the real world. Our constitution is very specific about what the federal government has the power to do, and it does not have the power to enforce this health care law. The problem does not lie with the constitution it lies with the liberals that try to redefine what the words mean.

    We are on the march toward socialism which as you said is the path to communism. Government control of business and a womb to the tomb nanny state have not and will never be successful. Maybe you should ask for your money back as your professors have failed to explain to you how awful socialism really is. Ask him why nobody fights to become a citizen of Cuba, quite the opposite they fight to get out of there. The more China has become Capitalistic the more powerful and innovative they have become.

    When you are 20 and have no responsibilities, it is easy to think that everyone deserves everything. Why do people who don't work for something deserve to have it? How do they get it? Don't you have to take from someone else to give it to them? Isn't that stealing? Ask your professor that. Your professor is would more than likely be on welfare if he wasn't lucky enough to get that job. He is more than likely unable to hold down a real job in corporate America.

    I hope you take the time to actually read the accounts of what our founders believed. It will change your life and your mind. The problem is we allow professors to teach opinion instead of fact.

    -- Posted by DOWNWITHDEMS on Fri, Apr 2, 2010, at 11:54 PM
  • If Socialism is the path to Communism, why is it that there are so many counties that have a combination of Free Trade and Socialist programs and manage to flourish?

    -- Posted by stafinois on Sat, Apr 3, 2010, at 7:12 PM
  • What socialist country is flourishing? There aren't any. No socialist country provides the standard of living we have here. You may say Luxembourg, but what do they produce? The only way socialism has made it as long as it has in these countries is because we provide an army if they need one. Europe is broke. Look at our socialist states in the US, California is broke, New Jersey broke, New York broke. Socialism=bankruptcy=poverty for all. I would rather have a chance at prosperity than be guaranteed a mediocre existence.

    You people sit there and let the government control you lives. Is it because you are lazy or too scared to take a chance and fail? In New York they are banning salt in restaurants. You can't own a business and let your patrons smoke. You have to wear a seat belt. They want to take your guns. One by one our rights are stripped from us. Soon all you will be able to watch is propaganda television, which most of you watch now. People should be able to choose what to do with their lives, good or bad. They should have to live with the results. If you eat fatty foods and have a heart attack, your fault. If you smoke and get cancer your fault. If you have a child out of wed lock, your fault. Don't burden someone else because you made a poor decision. Hold people accountable for their choices, that is what we built a nation on. Socialism allows you to make poor decision after poor decision. It is ok, how could you possibly know better? What a crock.

    -- Posted by DOWNWITHDEMS on Sat, Apr 3, 2010, at 10:36 PM
  • And this again shows how this just goes round and round. When I read your way of thinking, it comes across to me as "I'm a selfish jerk that doesn't care about anybody but ME!" Ever heard of being a community and caring for your neighbor?

    Yes, the European countries have a economic downturn. But wait, so do we!!!

    -- Posted by stafinois on Sun, Apr 4, 2010, at 7:09 PM
  • Europe is in a permanent economic downturn. I am far from selfish, I just think that I am better capable of helping people with my money than the government is. I also think that a person should be able to choose what they donate their money to. If you want to give money to art projects go right ahead, if you want to fund abortions go ahead, if I want to fund genetics research I will do so. You socialist/communist folk think that you are better capable of distributing my money than I am.

    To be honest I am glad that we are in an economic downturn. I am glad that big government/democratic policies have burdened us to the point of bankruptcy. It will help us get rid of these hand outs. It is funny to watch these leftist states struggle because they think everyone deserves everything for nothing. It proves that socialism cannot and will not ever work.

    I do believe in helping my neighbor, I should and do help my neighbors. I don't believe that the government should help my neighbors, because even if they promise that they will the government doesnt care about my neighbors.

    -- Posted by DOWNWITHDEMS on Sun, Apr 4, 2010, at 9:34 PM
  • down with dems is a typical rush limbaugh or glenn beck listener. every single thing he is talking about could probably be taken directly from them. you think socialism is horrible.. but socialism brings you your fire departments, police departments,takes care of your roads and highways, and educates your children. ive read some of your other blogs and i can tell your for big business and tax breaks for the rich, illegal wars like iraq and "personal responsibilty".

    down with dems is probably not rich, he or she probably does not even make $30000 a year. socialism would help this person way more than free market capitalism would. free market capitalism is a cancer on society... it does not care who it takes over, the environment that it ruins or the men, women, and children that it can maim or kill. the massey coal mine explosion in west virginia is the perfect example of this. massey ceo don blankenship is on the record saying that, "coal pays the bills" and was willing to sacrifice the miners who died to reap massive profits while running a company that had a horrendous safety record.

    if you dont like the health care bill.. thats fine. but keep dreaming if you think that will ever be repealed. its not what i wanted, i wanted single payer. but hopefully this is a start to that objective. ive been to canada ten times in the last two years and i can tell you one thing, they will tell you their system is not perfect, but none of them would trade their health care system for what we have here.

    i wish all conservatives would just admit why they all hate govt. now since this last election. they cant stand the thought of a black man in the "white house".

    -- Posted by phatboy1976 on Sat, Apr 17, 2010, at 7:34 PM
  • Wait until November.

    -- Posted by guitarman on Sat, Apr 24, 2010, at 6:47 AM
  • Well, it is easy to see that more libs read this than conservatives. Why is it always when a conservative tries to point out that you can't force "compassion" through legislation that they are called selfish and ignorant? Every liberal on this post wants the same eutpoia that we all want, the difference is that conservatives wish it to originate in the heart of man and libs wish it to originate through a left-wing mandate. Keep the government away from me and my money and I will socialize with others who have the same heart and compassion that I have. Interestingly enough, we will not turn on each other, we will thrive. Those forced to "all get along" will turn on each other like hungry sharks in a tank. Just the truth.

    -- Posted by read me on Sat, Jul 31, 2010, at 8:11 AM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: