Buying Stocks At the Grocery Store?, A crisis in American governance

ahit 01013

Coming Soon: Buying Stocks At the Grocery Store?

It is often said that a market bubble has reached its peak when everybody wants to get in on the action. When it becomes a fad that attracts the gullible masses who have no business buying into it, then you know that the market is completely saturated, and will likely burst in the near future.

Keep that in mind as you read the following. Apparently stores like Kmart, Office Depot, Safeway, and Toys “R” Us are preparing to sell stocks in their checkout lines, which will be sold like gift cards. Instead of cashing them in for merchandise, you’ll be able to cash these cards in for stocks. The idea was created by patent attorney Avi Lele who wanted to give his nieces and nephews stocks for Christmas, but was frustrated when he had to attain their Social Security numbers first. “It is taking something complicated and expensive and making it accessible to everyone,” he said to the Wall Street Journal.

So far 20 different companies will be available, including heavy hitters like Facebook Inc., Coca Cola Co., Apple Inc., and Berkshire Hathaway, and even precious metals like gold and silver (the fake kind of course, who would want real gold?). Mr. Lele is hoping to make his stock cards available in time for the holidays. If this isn’t a shoeshine boy moment, then I don’t know what is.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple


Iowa park rangers now armed with M-16 rifles

DES MOINES, Iowa —Some three dozen Iowa park rangers are now carrying semi-automatic weapons.

The Department of Natural Resources recently paid $1,400 for each gun. They are civilian versions of M-16 rifles.

Iowa park rangers are certified peace officers like police, sheriff’s deputies and state troopers.

“There’s always that possibility in the law enforcement world. It is going to be needed or it will be needed. Now that I’m issued the rifle, I’m glad it is something else that I have the ability to use,” said Carly Fairly, a Pleasant Creek Park ranger.

The rangers said the guns will help them assist other departments.

All rangers must complete three days of training at a shooting range.

From HERE.

Note the next to last line. Now do you see how our government is slowly creating a national police force to enforce their will upon the people?


A Scene From The Coming Diversity Wars

General Staff Building, Western Military District Headquarters, St. Petersburg, Russia

9:34 PM, Sept. 19, 2036. The Darkest Days of World War 3

*a young cismale officer bursts into the war room*

Lt. Sergei Ivanov: General! Terrible news from the front!

Gen. Mikhail Petrov: What do you mean, Lieutenant?

Ivanov: The Americans … they’re sending their most diverse units to attack Smolensk!

Petrov: Just … just how diverse do you mean?

Ivanov: It’s the Fourth Marine Division … the Fighting Jenners. Astonishingly, they’re almost equally split between blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians.

Petrov: Terrible news … but we’ve held off racially balanced units before. As long as they’re still mostly straight men …

Ivanov [interrupting]: That’s not all commander. They’re 75 percent women. 30 percent identify as gay, 12 percent as bisexual, 7 percent as assorted queer sexualities.

Petrov: My God … Trannies?

Ivanov: Two whole rifle companies. Crack troops. Best of the best.

Petrov: Blyad! Prepare to evacuate to Moscow. We cannot hope to contain such a strong enemy with our regular white, cishet divisions.

Ivanov: But sir! We could still counterattack! If the enemy force is 75 percent women, then maybe we can hit them when all of their menstrual cycles are lined up. They’ll be too cramped and bloated to fight back!

Petrov: Watch your language, lieutenant. Not all women menstruate, and not all those who menstruate are women. We can’t assume anything.

Ivanov: I’m sorry, sir. Is … is there any hope?

Petrov: At this point, I’m afraid not. We should have accepted President Malia Obama’s ultimatum to legalize gay marriage and recognize all 17 genders while we had the chance.

Ivanov: Wait, sir! I have another idea. It’s not too late to adopt the Americans’ military doctrine. We could start identifying as trans* as well!

Petrov: By God, Ivanov, you’re a genius! Fetch some scalpels from the surgeon’s tent, and tell Col. Kozak to requisition the supply of hormones we captured from the French at Kursk. Send a message to Moscow and tell them we need to concentrate every racial and ethnic studies professor we have in Smolensk, so we can make our forces there as transracial as possible. We’ll lick those Americans yet!

That night, Gen. Mikhail Petrov re-identified herself as Sofiya Jackson, a black trans* woman of size, and led her newly diversified soldiers into the decisive battle at Smolensk. While Jackson fell in the battle, she did so having given birth to a new, more diverse Russian army, one that could battle the Americans on an equal footing. The war, so close to ending in an easy American victory, would continue for many years to come… but that is a story for another time.

More great satire found HERE.

dancing bears 1013

How Do You Prepare A Child For Life In The American Police State?

What America Will Look Like Following The Collapse: Five Things You Can Count On Happening


A crisis in American governance

“The Court”

This, like any form of commentary is a matter of personal opinion and as such is the moral equivalent of a rectum. Everybody has one and most all of them stink.  The Bill of Rights is a spectacular effort at defining governance and the protections from government and petty tyrants offered the individual. It is stellar in its impact and brilliant in its conception.

So what’s the problem?

We’re steadily assaulted by the Executive branch in their thinking they have specific powers never clearly enumerated in the specificity of the constitutional verbiage used. It’s left open to interpretation by the party overstepping their bounds. In other words, the lack of firmly defined principles in the past has created a crisis in American governance today.

The final arbiter of these problems between the representative legislature and the Executive is supposed to be the Supreme Court. “The Court” is supposed to decide the Constitutionality of any enacted law against the standards set within the Bill of Rights as written. The law is NOT supposed to be defined by the dogmatic harangue of any political party in obedience to its party leaders. It’s supposed to be balanced against the words written and the ideals understood. It’s my belief the Bill of Rights is a document of extreme clarity in its simplicity. It’s meant to protect the individual as a member of a society. It’s meant to define OUR culture as strictly American as opposed to a version of hyphenated, fragmented and potentially abusive ideologies at odds with the American Dream as envisioned by the “Founding Fathers”.

The Bill of Rights and its companion piece, the Constitution, was developed because the writers were only too familiar with the abuses suffered under the rule of the despotic and insensitive King George III. Despotism wasn’t an abstract notion for them. It was reality and they knew the processing of the avaricious nature of man was to subjugate his fellows purely from a stance of superior military numbers and injudicious legislative actions designed to serve the elite and maintain their posture and alleged superiority in fact and practice.

Look at “your” president, (he ain’t MY president) and the Congress composed of millionaires and privileged characters believing they define YOUR rights and are better suited than you to decide your operative present and your proposed future. If you can’t see and recognize their egotistical, self-centered, self-possessed, self-aggrandizement; simply look at their acceptance of one of the most obvious forms of conflict of interest: they write their own paychecks as defined by laws they authored, passed and enforce without the permission of the people of the United States.

Can you do that?

“The Court” is supposed to take law as written and define its constitutionality as it applies to that one individual law. It must ask: “Does this law protect and serve the individual as a member of society?” NOT : how does this OPEN society to accept new and different concepts of “constitutionality”. “The Court” wasn’t meant to be the de facto rubber stamp approval offered for the duration of a politically dogmatic and thus, prejudiced party affiliation. These political affiliations can last decades because placement on “The Court” is for life. (That’s better than many marriages last.).

Continue reading HERE.

post cutie 3 1013


Welcome to IowaDawg's Blog!
My blog is really what I like to blog about, what I find on the internets that strike my fancy.
One thing I would like you to check out is the above navigation bar. It is on top of every post. Has great products you may be interested in purchasing.
Right below are sites you should check out.
And hey, do follow me on twitter: Follow IowaDawg on Twitter

Best Host Company

Conservative Books