5:30?  PM?!  no, no frickin way!!!  the Post always goes out in the morning…it is Wednesday right??!!  It can’t be that late…damn..

OK, OK I can deal with this…
“HI! Welcome to the Latefield Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clark, scotts and rogers).  We apologise for the lateosity of this Post, time just got away from us. (we already used all the Chambers Brothers references)?  So, we got a good response to yesterdays (really, I only took a short naplette this morning, I really meant…), to Mel’s guest appearance on the Doctrine.  The good news is that the (next installment) of Couples in Love (Part Tree) should be out tomorrow…sure, mid-day without doubt…Friday is a heart attack cinch, look for it bright and incredibly early Friday.

Will finish this tonight and get it up before days end, just because, I guess.  For the last few weeks it has been an article of pride that a new Post shows up each and every day. Yeah, the quality versus quantity debate is very much alive, but I want to decide it not under duress, which not getting a new Post in today would create.  So pardon my mediocrity for today, at any rate.  You know, maybe that is the appeal I will make to you Readers!  Damn straight!

Hey Readers!!  What do you want?  A new Post every day or only what I (personally) consider a good Post, irrespective of the rate, be it once a day or 3 times a week.
Tell me…I really want to know.  Right below the video, at the end of the Post is a place for Comment.  Leave a Comment, tell me what you think about the quality/quantity question.  I will let you know the response by the weekend, until then it is a new Post every damn day.

WARNING WARNING WARNING
the following section is to be read by clarks only!
…because you wouldn’t get it, that’s why….
…you don’t think that’s true?…let’s do this, I will ask you a single question and based on your first and immediate answer, you will agree to not read the following section, even if it means closing your eyes for the next few paragraphs.
If you answer this question with anything but a serious answer (including “what do you mean” and “why would I want to do that”) then you are a scott or a roger and so don’t need to read the next section.
…ready?
…..sure?

(If you could), who would you rather be right this moment?

alright, that should take care of the scotts and the rogers…yes, clark?
no, gender and age are not optional variables in the context of this particular question…good thought though…

So here it is.  This whole Wakefield Doctrine thing is obviously the work of a clark.  And because of that, the intent of the the Doctrine is to develop a tool to help us attain our goal.
(…clearly stated in the page on clarks, clark)
(yes, I know you knew that, but you still have to read those particular words to get what I am driving at)…
Because, my blog , my rules.  (You know you are talking to another clark, because they will already have some sort of system to help understand the world and find the secret)…yeah I know I’m running on…waiting for the last scott or roger to get totally bored….

Alright.  I want to let you know that this Doctrine is proving to be efficacious, even at this early point and I am discovering some previously un-anticipated effects…(very funny…). I will not go into detail, but will say this…as the effect increases you will begin to see a fundamental change in the scotts and rogers in your world…a ‘thinning out’, an ‘increasing transparency’, try not to be alarmed.  Will report more as I learn more.
Just wanted you to know.

…” and the roger said to the scott, that’s not my….” Oh hi!  Didn’t see you come back.  Yeah all done here.

Don’t forget coming in a day or two, “Couples in Love”,  gooood Doctrine.