​WHY MEN ARE SELDOM  DEPRESSED:
 
What do you expect from such simple creatures?
 
The garage is all yours.
 
Wedding plans take care of themselves.
 
Chocolate is just another snack.
 
You can never get pregnant.
 
You can wear a white T-shirt to a water park.
 
You can wear NO shirt to a water park.
 
Car mechanics tell you the truth.
 
The world is your urinal.
 
You never have to drive to another gas station restroom because this one is just too icky.
 
You don't have to stop and think of which way to turn a nut on a bolt.
 
Wedding dress $5000. Tux rental $100.
 
People never stare at your chest when you're talking to them.
 
New shoes don't cut, blister, or mangle your feet.
 
One mood all the time.
 
Phone conversations are over in 30 seconds flat.
 
You know stuff about tanks.
 
A five-day vacation requires only one suitcase.
 
You can open all your own jars.
 
If someone forgets to invite you,
 
He or she can still be your friend.
 
Your underwear is $8.95 for a three-pack.
 
Three pairs of shoes are more than enough.
 
Everything on your face stays its original color.
 
The same hairstyle lasts for years, even decades.
 
You only have to shave your face and neck.
 
You can play with toys all your life.
 
One wallet and one pair of shoes -- one color for all seasons.
 
You can wear shorts no matter how your legs look.
 
You can 'do' your nails with a pocket knife.
 
You have freedom of choice concerning growing a mustache.
 
You can do Christmas shopping for 25 relatives
 
On December 24 in 25 minutes.
 
*.*
 
While Bubba and Billy Bob were in the local Wal-Mart, they decided  to  get in on the weekly charity raffle.
 
They bought five  tickets each at a dollar a pop. The following week,  when the raffle was  drawn, each had won a prize.
 
Billy Bob won 1st  place- a year's supply of gourmet spaghetti sauce  and extra-long  spaghetti.
 
Bubba won 6th prize- a toilet  brush.
 
About a week or so had passed when the men met  back at Wal-Mart. Bubba asked Billy Bob how he liked his prize, to  which Billy Bob replied, "Great!, I love  spaghetti!"
 
Billy Bob asked Bubba, "How 'bout you,  how's the toilet brush?
 
"Not so good," replied  Bubba, "I'm thinking 'bout switching  back  to paper
 
*.*
 
Syrian Refugees Relieved Not To Be Sent To Detroit
 
LANSING, Mich — Nearly 10,000 refugees arriving in the United States over the next 11 months were relieved to learn that they would not be sent to Detroit, sources report.
 
Michigan Governor Rick Snyder suspended efforts to relocate Syrians displaced by the country’s civil war earlier this week “until a more reasonable and humane solution” could be found.
 
“They have already been through so much,” Snyder told the Detroit Free Press. “To be sent to another city in ruins with a corrupt and ineffectual government seems like a cruel joke.”
 
The city, while boasting the title “Most Dangerous City in America” for three years running, is still statistically safer than Syria. However, refugees have their heart set on “The American Dream” and will settle for nothing less.
 
“At first I was excited to learn about Detroit’s ‘lions’ and ‘tigers,'” said Eid Al Fayez from his tent in Turkey’s Nizip Refugee Camp, who reportedly ate the Al-Qarya al-Shama Zoo’s lions to survive. “But then I found out they were perennially underachieving sports teams.”
 
“If I wanted to be disappointed every year then I would have stayed in Syria and waited for the developed world to come to our rescue,” he added.
 
While there is hope for incoming refugees, there are still concerns for the nearly 20 Syrians who arrived in Detroit before Snyder suspended the relocation effort. According to the US Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), there is no reason to worry. PRM indicated nearly all of the registered refugees reported in interviews that their situation is “mostly better, kind of,” than living in a war zone.
 
“I’ll admit, when I looked down from the airplane as we were arriving to Detroit, I thought someone played a joke and flew us back to Raqqa,” Suheimat admitted.
 
*.*
 
Little Johnny's father took his small son to the zoo. 
 
They were standing in front of the tiger's cage at the zoo. Johnny's father was explaining how ferocious and strong tigers are, and little Johnny was taking it all in with a serious expression.
 
"Dad," Johnny said finally, "if the tiger got out of his cage and ate you up..."
 
"Yes, son?" Little Johnny's father said expectantly.
 
Johnny continued, "...what bus should I take home?"
 
*.*
 
BERLIN (Reuters) - A 53-year-old German woman who was driving her dead mother across country to save on mortuary transportation costs was fined by police for disturbing a dead person's peace.
 
"You're not allowed to transport dead people in your private car," said Ralf Schomisch, police spokesman in Koblenz, where the car was found after a tip-off from a mortuary.
 
"The corpse was on the back seat without a seat belt, which is clearly dangerous. These kinds of safety oversights result in fatalities, as is evident in this case."
 
Only in Germany....
 
Issue of the Times;
CNN’s Clinton Cash ‘Fact-Check’ Ends in Embarrassment for Cristina Alesci and Laurie Frankel by Ezra Dulis
 
CNN Money’s “fact-checkers” Cristina Alesci and Laurie Frankel ended up with egg on their faces on Wednesday after they rated as “false” a well-established and proven Clinton Cash fact involving Hillary Clinton’s State Dept. approving the transfer of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to the Russian government, as nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.
 
Under the guise of “fact-checking” Donald Trump’s Wednesday speech, Alesci and Frankel purported to verify whether “Clinton’s State Department approved the transfer of 20% of America’s uranium holdings to Russia while nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.”
 
Alesci (pictured, right) and Frankel (left) rate the claim as “false” and allege “there’s no hard evidence of a quid pro quo.” The CNN Money “reporters” also conceded that “CNN several times has asked the Clinton Foundation to confirm whether the nine investors who benefited from the deal also contributed to the foundation, but the foundation has yet to respond.”
 
Why Alesci and Frankel couldn’t confirm the $145 million in Clinton Foundation donations for themselves is curious. Indeed, in a 4,000-word front page story written over a year ago, the New York Times’ Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Jo Becker and Mike McIntire verified the Clinton Cash uranium revelation in stunning detail, including charts and graphs laying out the flow of millions of dollars from the nine investors in the uranium deal who flowed $145 million to Hillary’s family foundation. Since Alesci and Frankel appear unable to perform basic journalistic research, here are the names and amounts they are still waiting on the Clinton Foundation to get back to them on:
 
Frank Giustra, Canadian mining magnate who created a company that later merged with UraniumOne, gave $31.3 million and a pledge for $100 million to the Clinton Foundation
 
Frank Holmes, a shareholder in the deal who donated between $250,000 and $500,000 (the Clinton Foundation doesn’t report exact amounts, only in ranges) and is a Clinton Foundation adviser
 
Neil Woodyer, Frank Giustra’s colleague who founded Endeavor Financial and pledged $500,000 as well as promises of “ongoing financial support”
 
Robert Disbrow, a Haywood Securities broker, the firm that provided “$58 million in capital to float shares of UrAsia’s private placement,” gave the Clinton’s family foundation between $1 and $5 million, according to Clinton Cash
 
Paul Reynolds, a Canaccord Capital Inc., executive who donated between $1 million and $5 million. “The UrAsia deal was the largest in Canaccord’s history,” reports Schweizer
 
Robert Cross, a major shareholder who serves as UrAsia Energy Director who pledged portions of his future income to the Clinton Foundation
 
Egizio Blanchini, “the Capital Markets vice chair and Global cohead of BMO’s Global Metals and Mining group, had also been an underwriter on the mining deals. BMO paid $600,000 for two tables at the CGS-GI’s March 2008 benefit”
 
Sergei Kurzin, the Russian rainmaker involved in the Kazakhstan uranium deal and a shareholder in UrAsia Energy, also pledged $1 million to the Foundation
 
Uranium One chairman Ian Telfer committed $2.35 million
 
Alesci and Frankel claim there’s “no hard evidence of a quid pro quo.” Naturally, they fail to note that the legal standard for conflicts of interest and corruption do not require a quid pro quo. Nor do they note that Hillary Clinton deleted and destroyed over 30,000 emails housed on her secret server—the obvious location of any so-called “smoking guns.”
 
Still, the CNN Money “fact-checkers” correctly note that “the State Department was one of several agencies that needed to sign off on the transaction.” Indeed, the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS) has nine members, one of which is the State Dept. Yet through willful ignorance or an unusual lack of journalistic curiosity, Alesci and Frankel didn’t think to ask the obvious: which of the eight other agency heads needed to approve the deal were receiving $145 million to their family’s charity at the time of such a pivotal decision? And did Hillary Clinton’s State Department report the glaring conflict of interest before granting its approval of handing over 20 percent of American uranium to Putin’s Russia? Why didn’t Hillary Clinton recuse her agency from voting, knowing that her charity was receiving $145 million from nine investors in the deal?
 
Those questions apparently did not occur to Cristina Alesci and Laurie Frankel.
 
Also, in addition to the $145 million being funneled to the Clinton Foundation before the CFIUS approval, why was a Kremlin-backed bank bankrolling a $500,000 speech in Moscow for Bill Clinton while his wife led the Russian reset? As even the progressive New Yorker magazine put it, “But there is a bigger question: Why was Bill Clinton taking any money from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his wife was Secretary of State?” Shockingly, CNN Money fact-checkers Alesci and Frankel make no mention of the Kremlin-backed $500,000 Clinton speaking payment.
 
Nor did CNN’s crack “fact-checkers” mention that the Clinton Foundation received $2.35 million in hidden, undisclosed donations from Ian Telfer, the former head of the Russian government’s uranium company—another fact that multiple liberal news outlets have confirmed.
 
Indeed, as Bloomberg, Washington Post, New Yorker, ABC News, New York Times, and myriad other Establishment media have all confirmed, Clinton Cash’s most explosive revelations are accurate.
 
Apparently, CNN’s Cristina Alesci and Laurie Frankel are among the last to know.
 
Quote of the Times;
“Everything we do affects other people.”
 
Link of the Times;
http://www.infowars.com/report-three-syrian-refugees-rape-little-girl-at-knifepoint-in-idaho/
 
Subscribe or Submit to the Internet's elite source;
Send E-mail to efreem2@alumni.umbc.edu
to complement The Field!
 
Or
 
If you like what you see,
Witness the Archives;
www.SimpleDisorder.com
 
An Images & Ideas, Inc. Service.
 
AOD 318
　
 
 
　
}; - >

Some years ago, the famous San Diego Zoo opened a second, larger branch called the San Diego Wild Animal Park. The Park is built around an enormous open-field enclosure where the animals roam free. To see the animals, visitors ride on a monorail called the Wgasa Bush Line which circles the enclosure. Here's the true story of how the Wgasa Bush Line got its name.
 
They wanted to give the monorail a jazzy, African sounding name. So they sent out a memo to a bunch of zoo staffers saying, "What shall we call the monorail at the Wild Animal Park?" One of the memos came back with "WGASA" written on the bottom. The planners loved it and the rest is history.
 
What the planners didn't know was that the zoo staffer had not intended to suggest a name. He was using an acronym which was popular at the time. It stood for "Who Gives A Shit Anyhow?"
 
*.*
 
Donald Trump was asked if he could quote any Bible verses.
  
He answered, "Trump 20:16"
  
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Deport him and you do not have to feed him again."          
 
*.*
 
Based on a true story:
 
xxx: OK, so, our build engineer has left for another company. The dude was literally living inside the terminal. You know, that type of a guy who loves Vim, creates diagrams in Dot and writes wiki-posts in Markdown... If something - anything - requires more than 90 seconds of his time, he writes a script to automate that.
 
xxx: So we're sitting here, looking through his, uhm, "legacy"
 
xxx: You're gonna love this
 
xxx: smack-my-bitch-up.sh - sends a text message "late at work" to his wife (apparently). Automatically picks reasons from an array of strings, randomly. Runs inside a cron-job. The job fires if there are active SSH-sessions on the server after 9pm with his login.
 
xxx: kumar-asshole.sh - scans the inbox for emails from "Kumar" (a DBA at our clients). Looks for keywords like "help", "trouble", "sorry" etc. If keywords are found - the script SSHes into the clients server and rolls back the staging database to the latest backup. Then sends a reply "no worries mate, be careful next time".
 
xxx: hangover.sh - another cron-job that is set to specific dates. Sends automated emails like "not feeling well/gonna work from home" etc. Adds a random "reason" from another predefined array of strings. Fires if there are no interactive sessions on the server at 8:45am.
 
xxx: (and the oscar goes to) fucking-coffee.sh - this one waits exactly 17 seconds (!), then opens an SSH session to our coffee-machine (we had no frikin idea the coffee machine is on the network, runs linux and has SSHD up and running) and sends some weird gibberish to it. Looks binary. Turns out this thing starts brewing a mid-sized half-caf latte and waits another 24 (!) seconds before pouring it into a cup. The timing is exactly how long it takes to walk to the machine from the dudes desk.
 
xxx: holy sh*t I'm keeping those
 
*.*
 
Why do women have orgasms?
 
Just another reason to moan, really.
 
*.*
 
Enraged Pope Vows To Enlist In The French Foreign Legion
 
VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis has vowed to enlist in the French Foreign Legion and deploy to Syria, an unprecedented move prompted by a series of terrorist attacks by ISIS.
 
Officials confirm that the Pope has declared himself a “conscientious objector to the existence of ISIS” and plans to take part in direct combat. Though his Eminence must first obtain an age-waiver and graduate from boot camp.
 
Issue of the Times;
Grab the Popcorn, the Left Is Imploding by Gavin McInnes 
 
Last week I discussed our present state of “peak topsy-turvy.” It was a frustrating climb, but the reward at the top is we get to watch the “inmates who took over the journalistic asylum” destroy themselves.

After months of telling us we’re violent and violence isn’t the answer, we learn they think violence is okay as long as they’re the ones doling it out. Beta-faced Vox editor Emmett Resnin was just suspended for a week (with pay) after advocating violence against Trump supporters. HuffPo’s Jesse Benn agreed with Resnin, exclaiming, “Sorry Liberals, A Violent Response To Trump Is As Logical As Any.” I’d be stunned if either of them has ever been in a fight. The Killer Mike contingent of the Bernie Bros, however, is much more likely to “throw down,” and so they did when confronted with Trump supporters at a rally last week. Only they weren’t Trump supporters. They were fellow Bernie Bros. The bloodied but unbowed boobs then chanted, “Bernie! Bernie! Bernie!” while hoping nobody caught the incident on camera. We did.
 
You may be confused by this behavior because it’s conservatives who are the stupid rednecks getting everything wrong. Liberals are the calm, rational ones. Turns out they got it backwards. As the most “epic correction” of the century goes, “the manuscript was exactly reversed.” That’s right, the paramount study on what side is nuts, “Correlation not causation: the relationship between personality traits and political ideologies,” is completely topsy-turvy. “Thus,” the retraction states, “where we indicated that higher scores…reflect a more conservative response, they actually reflect a more liberal response.” This is exactly what I was screaming last week when I said we need to put all of modern society in a Word doc and go: edit, find, replace all.
 
The transocalypse is an even better confluence of cuckoldry to watch collapse. ACLU director Maya Dillard Smith helped push the cognitive dissonance that gender is a social construct and if a giant man with a deep voice says he’s a woman, he is. If said woman wants to use the ladies’, only a fool would stand in her way, right? It sounds reasonable on paper, until a couple of weeks ago when Dillard Smith’s daughters were stuck with two bosom buddies who were so clearly male, it left the ACLU director with a huge pile of “questions for which [she], like many parents, was ill-prepared to answer.” She quit and the bully from The Simpsons went, “Ha-ha.”
 
Bathrooms are fun, but you can’t eat popcorn in the loo. Sports is the ultimate entertainment and nowhere is the myth of equality more evident than when it’s slapped in the face by the meritocracy of athleticism. George Costanza would like to play in the NBA and it seems mean to say no, but Jewish actors playing neurotic Mexicans can’t jump, “Sorry, liberals.” Trans sports isn’t about a new kind of woman competing in women’s sports. It’s about men competing in women’s sports. Guess what happens when you do that. The women get obliterated. One of the more intense examples of this happened exactly a year ago when a dude with tits who calls himself Fallon Fox pounded Tamikka Brents so hard she was knocked unconscious. “I’ve never felt so overpowered ever in my life,” Brents complained afterward. Once again, the people insisting men are women and women are men are left with blood on their hands.
​
The charade has continued unabated since then. In April of this year, 60 Minutes reported on an incredibly gifted female athlete who got a swimming scholarship at Harvard. She then decided she was a dude and they dutifully moved her over to the men’s team where she went from ruling to sucking. This is where America is headed, by the way. Watching zirs fellow athletes high-five zir and try to ignore the scars where ze had zirs tits removed is a perfect example of how determined we are to ignore what is right in front of us. Feminism and gender equality are really about taking the miracle of childbirth away from women and turning them into shitty dudes.
 
Then, at the end of last month, we learned that Australia’s national women’s team lost 7–0 to a bunch of postpubescent boys. Wait, didn’t The Daily Show tell me the only reason female soccer players make less money than men is because of sexism? I guess our instincts were right after all. Look, we’ve all seen women’s soccer. We all know that it is vastly inferior to its male counterpart, but that sounds antiegalitarian so the left just waves its magic wand of equality and says, “Not so.” The rest of us try to tell them what’s happening outside but they put their fingers in their ears and go, “Na na na na na na na na I can’t hear you.” So we shrug and walk away like when Jason Statham walks away from a giant explosion in an action movie.
 
Such an explosion happened last week when Nattaphon Wangyot, an Alaskan man with makeup on, absolutely tore his high school’s girls’ track-and-field competition a new ass. As she(?)…ze(?)—fuck it—HE trampled past real girls and into the state finals, one of them carefully avoided pronouns and transphobia by saying, “I’m glad that this person is comfortable with who they are and they’re able to be happy in who they are, but I don’t think it’s competitively completely 100 percent fair.” If it is fair, Caitlyn Jenner needs to return her Olympic gold from the 1976 Games. That decathlon was for dudes.
 
We warned you, dummies. We tried to tell you that women aren’t men but you cited backwards studies that said we were backwards and plowed forward into the land of make-believe. Now that we have only five months left before Trump is president, we’re going to leave you to your own devices because it’s fun watching you fail. Bring on the third act
Quote of the Times;
“Naked power is quicksilver, lost in a flash.  So power rushes to form, which endows power with legitimacy, defines the processes whereby it is acquired, exercised, delegated, transferred.  Hiding behind form, power acquires stability.  Form is a structure of power but claims legitimacy as a map of reality.  Reality is flux, while power, always trying to preserve itself, insists on the permance of forms; so form falls ever more at variance with the changing reality it claims faithfully to reflect.  Power clings to form even after forms claim to truth has become manifest travesty.” – Wheelis
 
Link of the Times;
http://coolmaterial.com/tech/google-project-ara-phone/
 
Subscribe or Submit to the Internet's elite source;
Send E-mail to efreem2@alumni.umbc.edu
to complement The Field!
 
Or
 
If you like what you see,
Witness the Archives;
www.SimpleDisorder.com
 
An Images & Ideas, Inc. Service.
 
AOD 318
　
 
 
　
}; - >

An Ode to the English Plural
  
We'll begin with a box, and the plural is boxes,
But the plural of ox becomes oxen, not oxes.
One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,
Yet the plural of moose should never be meese.
You  may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice,
Yet the plural of house is houses, not hice.
 
If the plural of man is always called men,
Why shouldn't the plural of pan be called pen?
If I speak of my foot and show you my feet,
And I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?
If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,
Why shouldn't the plural of booth be called beeth?
 
Then one may be that, and there would be those,
Yet hat in the plural would never be hose,
And the plural of cat is cats, not cose.
We speak of a brother and also of brethren,
But though we say mother, we never say methren.
Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him,
But imagine the feminine: she, shis and shim!
 
Let's face it - English is a crazy language. 
There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger;
neither apple nor pine in pineapple. 
English muffins weren't invented in England.
 We take English for granted, but if we explore its paradoxes,
we find that quicksand can work slowly,
boxing rings are square,
and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.
It is a CUY!!! from Peru!!!!
 
And why is it that writers write, but fingers don't fing, grocers don't groce and hammers don't ham?
Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend?
If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of them, what do you call it?
 
If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught? 
If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?
Sometimes I think all the folks who grew up speaking English
should be committed to an asylum for the verbally insane.
 
In what other language do people recite at a play and play at a recital?
We ship by truck but send cargo by ship...
We have noses that run and feet that smell.
We park in a driveway and drive in a parkway.
And how can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same,
while a wise man and a wise guy are opposites?
 
You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language
in which your house can burn up as it burns down,
in which you fill in a form by filling it out, and
in which an alarm goes off by going on.
 
And in closing, if Father is Pop, how come Mother's not Mop? 
It is now understandable:
 
English people are Coo-Coo!! 
 
*.*
 
A husband and wife are travelling by car from Key West to Boston. After  almost twenty-four hours on the road, they're too tired to continue and  they decide to stop for a rest. They stop at a nice hotel and take a  room, but they only plan to sleep for four hours and then get back on the  road. When they check out four hours later, the desk clerk hands them a  bill for $350. The man explodes and demands to know why the charge is so  high. He tells the clerk that although it's a nice hotel, the rooms  certainly aren't worth $350. When the clerk tells him that $350 is the  standard rate, the man insists on speaking to the manager.
    
 The manager listens to the man and then explains that the hotel has an  Olympic-sized pool and a huge conference centre that were available for  the husband and wife to use.  He also explains that they could have taken  in one of the shows for which the hotel is famous. "The best entertainers  from New York, Hollywood and Las Vegas perform here," explains the  manager. No matter what facility the manager mentions, the man replies,  "But we didn't use it!"
 
 The manager is unmoved and eventually the man gives up and agrees to pay.
He writes a check and gives it to the manager. The manager is surprised  when he looks at the check. "But sir," he says, "this check is only made  out for $100."  "That's right," says the man. "I charged you $250 for  sleeping with my wife." 
 
"But I didn't!" exclaims the manager.
 
"Well," the man replies, " she was here, and you could have."
 
*.*

Golf has more rules than any other game, because golf has more cheaters than any other game.
 
*.*
 
It takes two things to be a consultant - gray hair and hemorrhoids.

The gray hair makes you look distinguished and the hemorrhoids make you look concerned.
 
*.*
 
Little Mary came home from school with a smile on her
face and told her mother,
 
"Frankie Brown showed me his willy today in the playground."
 
Before the mother could raise a concern, Mary went on to say, "It reminded me of a peanut."
 
Relaxing with a hidden smile, Mary's Mum asked, "Really small, was it?"
 
Mary replied, "No ..... Salty."
 
Issue of the Times;
The Greatest Anti-White Boxer of All Time by Jim Goad
 
Muhammad Ali, widely regarded as the world’s most famous man, died Friday at age 74. Born Cassius Marcellus Clay, he was a titan both as a boxer and a provocateur.
 
Because we live in an era much weaker and more sensitive than it was during Ali’s prime, his death is being eulogized with the sort of solemn, sanctimony-addled, weak-tea, low-T, hagiographic twaddle we’ve come to expect from neutered zombie bloggers on antidepressants. Just as mainstream history has Photoshopped all the warts off Nelson Mandela and MLK, Ali is now strictly framed as an inspirational figure who “spoke out against racism.” (Certainly they don’t mean the time he condemned interracial sex before a cheering crowd of Klansmen?)
 
The sad truth is that by shellacking history with a paintbrush soaked in modern pieties, they’re suppressing how hilariously insensitive Ali was. For example, after being forced into an impromptu photo session with The Beatles in 1964, he reportedly turned to an associate and asked, “So who were those little faggots?”
 
Mere weeks later, he announced that he was changing his “slave name” of Cassius Marcellus Clay to Muhammad Ali at the behest of Elijah Muhammad, leader of the Nation of Islam. For years, Ali would be used as a completely hoodwinked and manipulated and bamboozled puppet of the NOI and its ditzy theories about Yakub and the Mother Plane.
 
But sad to say, despite their well-deserved reputation as tremendous athletes and sparkling entertainers, many American blacks have an unfortunate tendency to do dopey things when attempting to “reclaim” their lost heritage. For example, when they renounce Christianity in favor of Islam, they are merely trading one group of their former slave masters for another. Likewise, the original Cassius Marcellus Clay—after whom the boxer was named—was a white anti-slavery crusader who fought with the Union in the Civil War, whereas Muhammad Ali of Egypt was a warlord whose army enslaved the Sudanese.
 
From 1964 to 1980, Clay/Ali gifted the world with a string of spectacularly insensitive comments that would get any modern white man socially exiled to Pluto for daring to utter their equivalent:
 
“Integration is wrong. The white people don’t want integration. I don’t believe in forcing it….”
—1964 interview with the Louisville Courier-Journal
 
“The white man want me hugging on a white women, or endorsing some whiskey, or some skin bleach, lightening the skin when I’m promoting black as best.”
—1966 interview with Sports Illustrated
 
“My enemies are white people, not Viet Congs or Chinese or Japanese.”
—1967 interview regarding the draft
 
“All Jews and gentiles are devils….Blacks are no devils….Everything black people doing wrong comes from (the white people—drinking, smoking, prostitution, homosexuality, stealing, gambling—it all comes from (the white people).”
—1969 interview with David Frost
 
“Every intelligent person wants his child to look like him. I’m sad because I [don’t] want to blot out my race and lose my beautiful identity? Chinese love Chinese—they love their little slanted-eyed, pretty brown-skinned babies. Pakistanis love their culture. Jewish people love their culture. Lotta Catholics don’t wanna marry nothing but Catholics, they want their religion to stay the same. Who wanna spot up yourself and kill your race? You a hater of your people if you don’t want to stay who you are.”
—1971 BBC interview with the portentously named Michael Parkinson
 
“A black man should be killed if he’s messing with a white woman. And white men have always done that….And not just white men—black men, too. We will kill you, and the brothers who don’t kill you will get their behinds whipped and probably get killed themselves if they let it happen and don’t do nothin’ about it.”
—1975 interview with Playboy
 
“You know the entire power structure is Zionist. They control America; they control the world.”
—1980 interview with India Today
 
Ali relentlessly taunted other black boxers, calling them “Uncle Toms” and “gorillas.” He once said that while clinching white boxers, he’d whisper in their ears that the Black Panthers knew where they lived and were going to burn their house down. He also reportedly lied in a 1975 autobiography when claiming that being refused service at a white restaurant caused him to toss his 1960 Olympics Gold Medal in the Ohio River. According to Ali’s friend Bundini Brown, “Honkies sure bought into that one!”
 
Although Ali’s indomitable ego fueled his ascendancy, it would later prove to be his undoing. He continued stubbornly fighting long after he’d lost his magic, and his 1980 battering at the hands of Larry Holmes was so lopsided, Holmes—a lifelong Ali fan—reportedly cried after the fight out of guilt. In 1984 Ali was diagnosed with what is now called Parkinson’s disease. It was a grim prolonged public spectacle to view the once indomitably brash heavyweight champion reduced to a jittering mess whose condition was so familiar that comedian Greg Giraldo once joked to Pamela Anderson, “You’ve caused me to spill more seed than Muhammad Ali at a bird feeder.”
 
Since the 1960s are still remembered as the time when everything changed for the better rather than started falling apart, the reigning modern historians have recast Ali as a man of peace and healing and love and one-worldsmanship rather than the fearless master of physical and psychological cruelty that he was.
 
Two of my favorite Ali quotes—besides “So who were those little faggots?,” which will never be topped—touch upon one of the most unspeakable topics in this modern “conversation” about race which we’re all supposed to be having but are simultaneously forbidden from even beginning to have. The topic is whether blacks, for all the oppression and brutality they allegedly endure in America, have it worse in Africa.
 
At the 1960 Rome Olympics, Ali told a reporter:
 
“To me, the U.S.A. is still the best country in the world, counting yours. It may be hard to eat sometimes, but anyhow I ain’t fighting alligators and living in a mud hut.”
 
After Ali spent months training in Zaire to fight George Foreman, a reporter asked him his impressions of Africa. Ali’s response proves that although his IQ was twice tested at 78, he was a genius at making pithy rejoinders:
 
“Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat.”
 
Quote of the Times;
San Jose’s police chief Eddie Garcia told his men not to intervene in the violence. He implausibly claimed that 250 cops were unable to handle an estimated 400 rioters. He is also, as luck would have it, a proud supporter of La Raza (The Race). In other words, a Latino cop who supports a pro-Mexican racial-identity group told his men to stand and watch while Mexicans beat up white people.
 
Link of the Times;
http://coolmaterial.com/tech/google-project-ara-phone/
 
Subscribe or Submit to the Internet's elite source;
Send E-mail to efreem2@alumni.umbc.edu
to complement The Field!
 
Or
 
If you like what you see,
Witness the Archives;
www.SimpleDisorder.com
 
An Images & Ideas, Inc. Service.
 
AOD 318
　
 
 
　
}; - >

St Peter becomes aware of a man standing outside the Gates of Heaven, pacing up and down.
 
"Excuse me, can I help you?" he asks.
 
"No, it's alright. Won't be long." And he distractedly looks at his watch, shrugs and paces on.
 
St Peter gives it another 5 minutes and asks again.
 
The man stops and says, "I know I'm dead. Will someone please tell the cardiac arrest team?"
 
*.*
 
What’s the difference between men and condoms?
 
Condoms and  not so thick and insensitive anymore.
 
*.*
 
Unparliamentary Behavior
 
An Australian politician has been ejected from a parliamentary debating chamber after nursing her 11-day-old baby there.
 
Former  Olympic aerial skier Kirstie Marshall, a Labor politician in Victoria state, was not ordered to leave the parliamentary chamber for breast-feeding, but for bringing a non-elected person into the chamber.
 
*.*
 
What do you call someone who refuses to fart in public?
 
A private tutor.
 
*.*
 
1945: A commander would put his butt on the line to protect his people.
 
2016: A commander will put his people on the line to protect his butt.
 
Issue of the Times;
If You Don’t Have Kids, You Don’t Matter
 
Following the recent attacks in Paris, immigration and multiculturalism are again in the spotlight. This is a good thing, but the discourse is as shallow as ever. We now hear arguments over what the greatest national security threat is to the West. Is it terrorism? Is it climate change? Both of these are genuine issues, but I’d give a completely different answer – demographic decline.
 
Many others have covered this topic, but lets explore further.
 
The dilemma
 
Every developed western country – bar one – has a fertility rate well below the replacement rate of about 2.1 children per woman. This problem is often underrated, but it poses serious threats to our culture, our institutions, and our way of life. Questions of a shortage of labor or cultural decline are one thing, but there’s a huge political element as well.
 
It is an easily found but rarely mentioned fact that, the further left on the political spectrum you are, the less likely you are to have kids. In raw figures, conservative women will have on average 41% more children than their liberal counterparts.
 
It is also true that political preferences are strongly correlated with parental views, being the dominant factor around 70% of the time.
 
The short of it is that, assuming the number of conservatives and liberals is about even, within two or three generations the descendants of today’s conservatives would outnumber their liberal counterparts 2:1.
 
The only way the left can make up for this demographic shortfall, as they are acutely aware, is to support increasingly generous immigration policies. This allows them to replace the millions of liberal babies that are never born with immigrants imported straight from the third world.
 
This poses an obvious question. Nearly all of them come from more conservative countries compared to the west. Polls overwhelmingly show that few Muslims are tolerant of homosexuality, abortion or sex outside marriage for instance. So how does the left guarantee their loyalty?
 
Immigrants
 
The key factor here is that the vast majority of these immigrants are poor. 90% of blacks and 70% of Hispanics don’t vote for the Democrats because they’ve been brushing up on their Karl Marx (the 90% figure also predates Obama).
 
Left-leaning parties, from the Democrats in the US to the labor parties in the rest of the Anglosphere to the social democrats of Europe, are able to buy them out with generous handouts on the taxpayer dime. Along with the collapse of the family unit, this is one of the major contributing factors to the West’s deteriorating financial situation.
 
Eventually however, we know the welfare spigot that keeps these votes flowing to the left is going to run dry. Trilion dollar deficits aren’t sustainable forever. What happens then? Where will their loyalties lie?
 
The outcome
 
The breakdown of this uneasy alliance is going to be one of the defining political issues of our generation. Make no mistake, immigrant communities will turn on the left, as surely as the Allies turned on each other at the end of World War Two. Liberals will be typically bewildered by this—but weren’t we so nice to them?
 
As their voter base collapses between conservative whites on the one hand and conservative immigrants on the other, I would like to pose a serious question: how on earth will the left preserve their liberal agenda?
 
What happens to fifty years of no-fault divorce, welfare programs, domestic violence campaigns, free contraception, gay rights, legalized drugs, prostitution, nightclub culture, topfreedom and so on?
 
And not all of these things are fundamentally bad of course. The fact that women can walk around in miniskirts unmolested, that someone can legally flee their abusive spouse, that gays aren’t being publicly stoned—some of these things are rather nice, lets admit that.
 
Miniskirts
 
The problem here is they may not be sustainable. They’re the social equivalents of the welfare state.
 
The theory is really quite simple.
 
Society A takes the progressive route. Full of moral indignation, they let women out of the kitchen and dismantle the family unit. The birth rate promptly collapses.
 
Society B sticks to more traditional, if harsher, social policies, and manages to maintain a stable population.
 
At the end of the day, which one remains standing? Which one endures?
 
The average fertility rate in richer countries has been below two children per woman for decades now. The average American woman, not including ethnic minorities, has 1.8 kids. In Europe this figure is 1.5 and in Japan 1.4.
 
Japan
 
South Korea is one of the worst examples at 1.3 children per women. In 1980 it had 5.7 million elementary school students, today there are just three million. Korea is expected to go from 50 million people today to as low as 34 million by 2060 – and half of them will be over 60.
 
Perhaps most startling is how this contrasts with their northern neighbors. The North Koreans (famine and all) are bang on the replacement rate.
 
In other words, according to current trends – North Korea is going to win in the end.
 
This shows you the truly awesome destructive effects of cultural Marxism. It can take a country transformed so radically from a third world backwater into an economic powerhouse and run it back into the ground barely a generation later.
 
Deeper questions can be asked about the limits of tolerance. Can such wildly different ethnic groups really just get along? Fast forward to 2050, when today’s ethnic minorities in Europe, North America and Australia might make up closer to 50% of the population. Is this not a recipe for violence?
 
The threat of terrorism is often exaggerated. The Paris attacks killed 130 people, but even France already averages 600+ murders per year. Its still less than a month’s worth of traffic accidents.
 
But Muslims are currently less than 10% of the French population. What if it were 30% or 40%? That’s no longer a recipe for mere sporadic violence. Its a possible prelude to civil war.
 
ISIS
 
Previously this may have sounded far-fetched, but it sounds a lot less ridiculous in 2015 then even five years ago. We’re in the era of ISIS, an organisation whose ranks include as many as 30,000 foreign fighters, including some 5,000 westerners.
 
We’re also seeing something of a nationalist revival on the right, as the four million Britons who recently voted for UKIP shows. Donald Trump wouldn’t have been taken seriously in 2008 or 2012, but now hits a chord with millions of Americans.
 
Ethnic tensions perhaps haven’t been this high in the West since the days of the Second World War. I believe we’re now entering an era of growing clashes between nationalists on the right and immigrant communities and their sympathizers on the left. The outcome is unclear. Like the spread of Communism last century, some countries will fall like dominoes. In others the struggle will be more protracted.
 
A warning
 
Most people, even the most vocal critics of left-wing social policies, seem blissfully unaware of the demographic and political time bombs they are slowly nesting.
 
To them I say this: it is all very well and good to declare yourself a “strong independent woman” who doesn’t need a man, but if you fail to have children and instill those same values in them, then your politics will be as much an evolutionary dead end as you are.
 
Unless you happen to do something that breaks new scientific ground, like curing cancer or inventing a warp drive, your spawn and the values you raise them with are the only real legacy you leave. It simply doesn’t matter how right you were in your moral leanings.
 
It doesn’t matter which party you voted for when you were alive, or how many leaflets for an anti-racism rally you handed out at the local train station. It doesn’t matter how high you held up that “My body! My decision!” sign at the pro baby killing women’s choice rally.
 
What matters is that, if you fail to procreate, the DNA patterns that irrevocably make up you will cease to exist the moment your corpse decomposes.
 
Meanwhile that asshole neighbor of yours who voted for Romney is raising three or four more little Republicans as you sit there stroking your cats, and the Muslim family down the street is pumping out another Mohammad or Fatima every other year on the taxpayer dime.
 
The future belongs to those who worked hard to create a stable family situation in which they could raise their spawn, while you were busy trying to overthrow the patriarchy without any thought as to what followed. As far as the world is concerned, you sucked in oxygen for a few decades, then vanished without a trace.
 
Crazy cat lady
 
I’m trying to plead here, quite sincerely, about this fundamental threat to the society we’ve created. It is something that will affect its more progressive elements in particular.
 
But like a drug addict who just can’t quit, you refuse to acknowledge your self-destructive actions. You either ignore, or somehow celebrate, as the west’s liberal youth becomes increasingly sexually impoverished and retreats into internet pornography and spinsterhood.
 
As some have also pointed out, if the west is taken over by Islam, all I’d have to do is grow a beard and get up early for morning prayers. Women would be marched straight back to the kitchen. You have the most to lose, so please just listen for a moment.
 
Maybe all of us dream of creating a more “moral” society. Maybe someday it will be truly possible, but the current experiment appears to be failing, and the society it has created has become rotten to the core. If in another fifty or a hundred years, that society simply doesn’t exist anymore, then those cultures who have chosen a more traditional mold will expand to fill the gap.
 
This has serious consequences not only for liberalism, but for democracy as a concept. If industrialized democracies inevitably end up suffering a demographic decline, then who does the future below to? Basic maths would seem to make the outcome inevitable.
 
The side that wants to win must start having more kids. Or lose.
 
Quote of the Times;
Never regard as a benefit to yourself anything which will force you at some point to break your faith, to leave integrity behind, to hate, suspect, or curse another, to dissemble, to covet anything needing the secrecy of walls and drapes.
 
Link of the Times;
http://io9.gizmodo.com/its-dangerous-to-go-it-alone-in-hang-em-hyrule-1724301243
 
Subscribe or Submit to the Internet's elite source;
Send E-mail to efreem2@alumni.umbc.edu
to complement The Field!
 
Or
 
If you like what you see,
Witness the Archives;
www.SimpleDisorder.com
 
An Images & Ideas, Inc. Service.
 
AOD 318
　
 
 
　
}; - >

Great Sayings by Women

Things are going to get a lot worse before they get worse.

Old age ain't no place for sissies.

A man's got to do what a man's got to do. A woman must do what he can't.

Every time I close the door on reality it comes in through the windows.

I try to take one day at a time, but sometimes several days attack me at once.

If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning.

*.*
​
A father brought his son into the doctor because the boy had a matchbox car shoved up his nose. All the while the doctor was trying to remove the car, the father kept saying "I don't know how he did it!" Finally the doctor removed the car, and the father and son left.

A few hours later, the father came back with the matchbox shoved up HIS nose. He told the doctor, "I know how he did it!"

*.*

40 Xcellent X-Words

When the lexicographer Dr. Samuel Johnson put together his Dictionary of the English Language in 1755, he included a disclaimer at the bottom of page 2308 that read, “X is a letter which though found in Saxon words, begins no word in the English language.” Noah Webster went one better when he published his Compendious Dictionary in 1806 that included a single X-word, xebec, defined as “a small three-masted vessel in the Mediterranean Sea.” Although, by the time he compiled his landmark American Dictionary in 1828, that total had risen to 13.
X has never been a common initial letter in English, and even with today’s enormous vocabulary you can still only expect around 0.02% of the words in a dictionary to be listed under it. But why not try boosting your vocabulary with these forty excellent X-words?
1. X
On its own, the letter X is listed in the Oxford English Dictionary as a verb meaning “to cross out a single letter of type.” X. X. in Victorian slang meant “double-excellent,” while X. X. X.described anything that was “treble excellent.”
2. XANTHIPPE
Xanthippe was the name of Socrates’ wife, who, thanks to a number of Ancient Greek caricatures, had a reputation for henpecking, overbearing behavior. Consequently her name can be used as a byword for any ill-tempered or cantankerous woman or wife—as used in Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew.
3. XANTHOCOMIC
Xanthos was the Ancient Greek word for “yellow,” and as such is the root of a number ofmainly scientific words referring to yellow-colored things. So, if you’re xanthocomic, you have yellow hair; if you’re xanthocroic you have fair hair and pale skin; and if you’re xanthodontous, you have yellow teeth.
4. X-CATCHER
In old naval slang, an X-catcher or X-chaser was someone who was good at math—literally someone good at working out the value of x.
5. X-DIVISION
Victorian slang for criminals or pickpockets, or people who make a living by some underhand means.
6. X-DOUBLE-MINUS
1960s slang for something really, really terrible.
7. XENAGOGUE
Derived from the same root as xenophobia, a xenagogue is someone whose job it is to conduct strangers or to act as a guide while…
8. XENAGOGY
…a xenagogy is a guidebook.
9. XENIAL
The adjective xenial is used to describe a friendly relationship between two parties, in particular between a hospitable host and his or her guests, or diplomatically between two countries.
10. XENIATROPHOBIA
Don’t like going to see doctors you don’t know? Then you’re xeniatrophobic.
11. XENIUM
A xenium is a gift or offering given to a stranger, which in its native Ancient Greece would once have been a lavish feast or a refreshing spread of food and fruit. In the 19th century art world, however, xenium came to refer to a still-life painting depicting something like a extravagant display of food or a bowl of fruit.
12. XENIZATION
A 19th century word meaning “the act of traveling as a stranger.”
13. XENOCRACY
A government formed by foreigners or outsiders is a xenocracy. A member of one is axenocrat.
14. XENODOCHEIONOLOGY
Defined as “the lore of hotels and inns” by Merriam-Webster.
15. XENODOCHIUM
A guesthouse or hostel, or any similar stopping place for travelers or pilgrims.
16. XENODOCHY
A 17th century word for hospitality. If you’re xenodochial then you like to entertain strangers.
17. XENOGLOSSY
The ability to speak a language that you’ve apparently never learnt.
18. XENOLOGY
The scientific study of extraterrestrial phenomena is xenology. The study of extraterrestrial life forms is xenobiology.
19. XENOMANIA
The opposite of xenophobia is xenomania or xenophilia, namely an intense enthusiasm or fondness for anything or anyone foreign.
20. XENOMORPH
Something unusually or irregularly shaped is a xenomorph—which is why it’s become another name for the eponymous creature in the Alien film franchise.
21. XENOTRANSPLANTATION
Transplanting organic matter from a non-human into a human (like a pig’s heart valve into a human heart) is called xenotransplantation. Whatever it is that’s transplanted is called thexenograft.
22. XERIC
An ecological term used to describe anywhere extremely dry or arid. If it’s xerothermic, then it’s both dry and hot.
23. XERISCAPE
If you live in a xeric area, then you’ll have to xeriscape your garden. It’s the deliberate use of plants that need relatively little moisture or irrigation to landscape an arid location.
24. XEROCHILIA
The medical name for having dry lips. Having a dry mouth is xerostomia.
25. XEROCOPY
A xerographic copy of a document—or, to put it another way, a photocopy.
26. XEROPHAGY
The eating of dry food is xerophagy. It mightn’t sound like it, but it was originally a religious term.
27. XESTURGY
The proper name for the process of polishing.
28. XILINOUS
Something described as xilinous resembles or feels like cotton…
29. XIPHOID
…while something described as xiphoid resembles a sword.
30. XOANON
Derived from the Greek for “carve” or “scrape,” a xoanon is a carved idol of a deity.
31. XTAL
An abbreviation of “crystal,” according to the OED.
32. XYLOGRAPHER
A 19th century word for a wood engraver.
33. XYLOID
Why say that something is “woody” when you can say that it’s xyloid?
34. XYLOPOLIST
A 17th century formal name for a timber merchant.
35. XYLOTOMOUS
Describes anything or anyone particularly good at wood-cutting or wood-boring.
36. XYRESIC
Means “razor-sharp.”
37. XYROPHOBIA
The fear of being close to or touching sharp implements.
38. XYLANTHRAX
Nowhere near as nasty as it sounds, this is just an old name for what we now call charcoal.
39. XYSTUS
A type of covered walkway or portico.
40. X.Y.Z.
Late 19th century slang for a journalist who takes on any work going, or else 18th century slang for a dandyish or “exquisite” young man.

*.*

THE PENTAGON — Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley today announced the results of an exhaustive study conducted by the RAND Corporation aimed at understanding and lowering the divorce rates of soldiers.
 
“Going in, our assumption was that long and frequent deployments were the root cause of the higher than average divorce rates of our soldiers,” Milley said. “It turns out, instead, there’s a very high correlation between the frequency of a spouse removing their clothes in exchange for money and the divorce rate.”
Milley continued, “We also saw a spike in divorces when the spouse regularly uses methamphetamine and stays away from home for days at a time. We are still looking into this other phenomena.”
Dr. Philip Lynch, RAND Director of Research, noted, “The findings surprisingly didn’t support our initial assumptions.”
Lynch says that RAND has supplied Army Training Command with a new program to educate single soldiers during boot camp and then to be renewed annually.
“We really want the soldiers to be alert for five major warning signs,” Milley said. “If they can just remember these, they’ll be fine.”
Lynch said the warning signs are, “First, your fiancee or spouse frequently returns home from work with large stacks of one-dollar bills.”
“Second, you may want to be cautious if your spouse or fiancee was nude when you met her,” he continued. “Third, your fiancee insists she is saving money for medical school when in fact she dropped out of high school or middle school.”
Lynch says that the last two are “a strident insistence” that you purchase at least two drinks prior to speaking to her and then ordering champagne themselves, and then immediately jumping to her feet and taking off her shirt when Def Leppard’s “Pour Some Sugar On Me” comes on the radio.
Milley concluded the briefing by noting that while the five warning signs apply mainly to soldiers interested in women, those interested in men need to be cautious, too.

*.*

I saw a Muslim fall into the Niagara River this morning and being a responsible citizen, I informed the emergency services.
It's 6:00 PM and they still haven't responded!
I'm now starting to think I've wasted a stamp!

Issue of the Times;
Shooting The Unarmed Man - The Fallacy Of Modern Perception
 
“He shot an unarmed man!”
 
How often have we heard those screams from an angry community?  Trayvon Martin may be the first to come mind but it happens more often than most people think.  Kansas City firefighter Anthony Bruno, unarmed and drunk, was shot and killed by an off duty police officer.  And, of course, the most recent case of Michael Brown in St. Louis, Missouri.
 
The problem with the public outcry and the rioting in pursuit of “JUSTICE” is that most people know exactly nothing about physical combat and life threatening situations.  They assume that if a person is unarmed that deadly force cannot and should not be employed.  And they are wrong.
 
Have you seen the viral videos of “the knockout game?”  Many of those videos involve one solid blow to the head that results in an unconscious victim.  There is laughing and yelling and everyone runs away.  Well, what if they didn’t want to stop there?  What if the attacker decided that he would just kill someone today?  He now has an unconscious, helpless victim to beat to death.
 
Take the case of Michael Fobbs as an example.  He walked up to a man sitting on a bench and simply started hitting him repeatedly until the man was dead at an Amtrak station in Texas.  Would that victim have been authorized the use of deadly force? Fobbs was unarmed.
 
Bear in mind that more people were beaten to death with hands and feet than were killed by so-called assault rifles in 2012.  Those victims were not allowed to use deadly force simply because their attacker did not have a weapon?  I think not.  Laws on self defense seldom mention the use of a weapon.  They are based on a reasonable fear that your life is in jeopardy, not the presence of a weapon in the hands of your attacker.
 
You may have missed the television programs on the science of fighting.  In that series, Randy Couture was studied.  In his well-known “ground and pound” method of dispatching an opponent, Couture was able to generate over 2,000 pounds of force in his downward blows to an opponent’s head.  That’s the equivalent of dropping a car on your face.  Trained fighters seldom take the full force of those blows because they are moving and defending with their own arms and hands but what if the victim was not a trained fighter?  Couture, and any other trained fighter, could kill you with just a couple of blows to the head.
 
The rise in popularity of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and MMA style sports has also added new weapons to the attacker’s hands only arsenal.  Have you ever been choked out?  In MMA sports, the defender can “tap out” or the referee can end the fight and pull the attacker off of you.  In the real world, you will be choked until you die.  That’s a real fight.
 
So, if your attacker is unarmed and gets you in a choke, is that it? You’re just going to let yourself die because you won’t use lethal force against an unarmed opponent?  How about if you are on your back being hammered in the face and you are moments away from losing consciousness and eventual death?  Just going to accept your fate?  I seriously doubt that.
 
I’m not.  If I’m armed, I’m going to kill you.  Dead.
 
If a cop walks up to someone out of the blue, draws his pistol, and shoots them dead in the street, that’s one thing.  But, shooting an unarmed assailant during a fight in the street is another.  You do not know the intentions of the attacker and cannot allow yourself to be overpowered or knocked unconscious.  You will only be another statistic.
 
You also have no idea if your attacker IS armed and they just haven’t used their weapon yet.  You can’t wait until you are unable to defend yourself to find out.  I suspect most of you reading this would not.  So, why are we judging a police officer who makes the same decision you would make under the same circumstances?
 
Get a reality check, folks.
 
Quote of the Times;
“There never was a man of heroism and virtue who did not contemplate Death.”
 
Link of the Times;
http://www.returnofkings.com/88093/soviet-defector-yuri-bezmenov-accurately-predicted-how-america-would-decline
 
Subscribe or Submit to the Internet's elite source;
Send E-mail to efreem2@alumni.umbc.edu
to complement The Field!
 
Or
 
If you like what you see,
Witness the Archives;
www.SimpleDisorder.com
 
An Images & Ideas, Inc. Service.
 
AOD 318
　
 
 
　
}; - >

A gang of robbers broke into a lawyer's club by mistake. The old legal lions gave them a fight for their life and their money. The gang was very happy to escape.

"It ain't so bad," one crook noted. "We got $25 between us."

The boss screamed, "I warned you to stay clear of lawyers! We had $100 when we broke in!"
 
*.*
 
How do you confuse a feminist?
 
Tell them you refuse to allow them to make you a sandwich.
 
*.*
 
Donald MacDonald from the Isle of Skye went to study at an English university and was living in the hall of residence with all the other students there. After he had been there a month, his mother came to visit him.

"And how do you find the English students, Donald?" she asked.

"Mother," he replied, "they're such terrible, noisy people. The one on that side keeps banging his head on the wall and won't stop. The one on the other side screams and screams all night."

"Oh Donald! How do you manage to put up with these awful noisy English neighbors?"

"Mother, I just stay here quietly, playing my bagpipes."
 
*.*
 
Accidental Deaths You Won't Believe
Man dies crushed by a suicidal woman
 
A suicidal woman who jumped from an eighth floor window crushed a passer-by to death in a horrific accident. The woman hurled herself from the balcony in Viladecans, near Barcelona, and landed on top of a 50-year-old pedestrian who was walking below. The jumper died instantly, and the man, from the Ukraine, died in hospital shortly afterwards from his injuries. His wife, who was walking with him at the time, escaped with minor injuries in the incident.
 
 
Man dies after falling into vat of Hershey's chocolate
 
In a scene straight out of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, but with grim real life consequences, Vincent Smith II, an employee at the Cocoa Services Inc. chocolate factory in Camden, New Jersey, had a fatal accident. He was loading chunks of raw chocolate, when he slipped and fell into a large melting tank filled with 50 C (120F) Hershey's chocolate, and was knocked out by one of the mixing paddles. Smith was trapped in the melting tank for 10 minutes before rescuers were able to extract him. He was declared dead a short time later.
 
 
Roller Coaster Operator, caught by hair, gets scalped and killed
 
In 2003, an American amusement park operator was killed when his hair and arm got caught on a roller coaster car, pulling him up as high as 12 metres before he fell, back-first, onto a fence. Doug McKay, 40, was spraying lubricant on the tracks of the Super Loop 2, a ride at the Island County Fair on Whidbey Island, northwest of Seattle, when his long hair got caught on a car full of fairgoers. It basically scalped him, then he fell and landed on the fence.
 
 
Man dies after bee attack at his wife's funeral
 
Jaam Singh Girdhan Barela, a 50-year-old man, died after being stung by a swarm of honeybees while he was cremating his wife in a Madhya Pradesh village. The bees were disturbed after flames from the funeral pyre enveloped their nest.  While others fled, Barela could not, as he was performing the rituals.
 
 
Italian stripper suffocates to death inside surprise cake
 
In Consenza, Italy, stag party friends were curious when a stripper failed to jump out of a huge cake. Assuming she was no longer in there, they received a nasty surprise when they found her dead inside it. Gina Lalapola, 23, had suffocated after waiting for an hour inside the sealed cake.
 
*.*
 
How is a woman like a road?
 
They both have manholes.
 
Issue of the Times;
Robert Heinlein, Speech at the Naval Academy on Patriotism, 1973
 
(To the Brigade at large:)
Why are you here?
 
(To a second plebe:)
Mister, why are YOU here?
 
Never mind, son; that's a rhetorical question. You are here to become a naval officer. That's why this Academy was founded. That is why all of you are here: to become naval officers. If that is NOT why YOU are here, you've made a bad mistake. But I speak to the overwhelming majority who understood the oath they took on becoming midshipmen and look forward to the day when they will renew that oath as commissioned officers.
 
But why would anyone want to become a naval officer? In the present dismal state of our culture there is little prestige attached to serving your country; recent public opinion polls place military service far down the list.
 
It can't be the pay. No one gets rich on the pay. Even a 4-star admiral is paid much less than top executives in other lines. As for lower ranks, the typical naval officer finds himself throughout his career just catching up from the unexpected expenses connected with the last change of duty when another change of duty causes a new financial crisis. Then, when he is about fifty, he is passed over and retires... but he can't really retire because he has two kids in college and one still to go. So he has to find a job... and discovers that jobs for men his age are scarce and usually don't pay well.
 
Working conditions? You'll spend half your life away from your family. Your working hours? 'Six days shalt thou work and do all thou art able; the seventh the same, and pound on the cable.' A forty-hour week is standard for civilians - but not for naval officers. You'll work that forty-hour week, but that's just a starter. You'll stand a night watch as well, and duty weekends. Then with every increase in grade your hours get longer - until at last you get a ship of your own and no longer stand watches. Instead you are on duty twenty-four hours a day... and you'll sign your night order book with: 'In case of doubt, do not hesitate to call me.'
 
I don't know the average week's work for a naval officer but it's closer to sixty than to forty. I'm speaking of peacetime, of course. Under war conditions it is whatever hours are necessary - and sleep you grab when you can.
 
Why would anyone elect a career which is unappreciated, overworked, and underpaid? It can't be just to wear a pretty uniform. There has to be a better reason.
 
As one drives through the bushveldt of East Africa it is easy to spot herds of baboons grazing on the ground. But not by looking at the ground. Instead you look up and spot the lookout, an adult male posted on a limb of a tree where he has a clear view all around him - which is why you can spot him; he has to be where he can see a leopard in time to give the alarm. On the ground a leopard can catch a baboon... but if a baboon is warned in time to reach the trees, he can out-climb a leopard. The lookout is a young male assigned to that duty and there he will stay, until the bull of the herd sends up another male to relieve him. Keep your eye on that baboon; we'll be back to him.
 
Today, in the United States, it is popular among self-styled 'intellectuals' to sneer at patriotism. They seem to think that it is axiomatic that any civilized man is a pacifist, and they treat the military profession with contempt. 'Warmongers' - 'Imperialists' - 'Hired killers in uniform' - you have all heard such sneers and you will hear them again. One of their favorite quotations is: 'Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.' What they never mention is that the man who made that sneering remark was a fat, gluttonous slob who was pursued all his life by a pathological fear of death.
 
I propose to prove that that baboon on watch is morally superior to that fat poltroon who made that wisecrack. Patriotism is the most practical of all human characteristics. But in the present decadent atmosphere patriots are often too shy to talk about it - as if it were something shameful or an irrational weakness. But patriotism is NOT sentimental nonsense. Nor is it something dreamed up by demagogues. Patriotism is as necessary a part of man's evolutionary equipment as are his eyes, as useful to the race as eyes are to the individual. A man who is NOT patriotic is an evolutionary dead end. This is not sentiment but the hardest of logic.
 
To prove that patriotism is a necessity we must go back to fundamentals. Take any breed of animal - for example, tyrannosaurus rex. What is the most basic thing about him? The answer is that tyrannosaurus rex is dead, gone, extinct.
 
Which brings us to the second fundamental question: Will homo sapiens stay alive? Will he survive?
 
We can answer part of that at once: Individually h. sapiens will NOT survive. It is unlikely that anyone here tonight will be alive eighty years from now; it approaches mathematical certainty that we will all be dead a hundred years from now as even the youngest plebe here would be 118 years old by then - if still alive.
 
Some men do live that long but the percentage is so microscopic as not to matter. Recent advances in biology suggest that human life may be extended to a century and a quarter, even a century and a half - but this will create more problems than it solves. When a man reaches my age or thereabouts, the last great service he can perform is to die and get out of the way of younger people.
 
Very well, as individuals we all die. This brings us to the second half of the question: Does homo sapiens AS A BREED have to die? The answer is: No, it is NOT unavoidable. We have two situations, mutually exclusive: Mankind surviving, and mankind extinct. With respect to morality, the second situation is a null class. An extinct breed has NO behavior, moral or otherwise.
 
Since survival is the sine qua non, I now define 'moral behavior' as 'behavior that tends toward survival.' I won't argue with philosophers or theologians who choose to use the word 'moral' to mean something else, but I do not think anyone can define 'behavior that tends toward extinction' as being 'moral' without stretching the word 'moral' all out of shape.
 
We are now ready to observe the hierarchy of moral behavior from its lowest level to its highest. The simplest form of moral behavior occurs when a man or other animal fights for his own survival. Do not belittle such behavior as being merely selfish. Of course it is selfish... but selfishness is the bedrock on which all moral behavior starts and it can be immoral only when it conflicts with a higher moral imperative. An animal so poor in spirit that he won't even fight on his own behalf is already an evolutionary dead end; the best he can do for his breed is to crawl off and die, and not pass on his defective genes.
 
The next higher level is to work, fight, and sometimes die for your own immediate family. This is the level at which six pounds of mother cat can be so fierce that she'll drive off a police dog. It is the level at which a father takes a moonlighting job to keep his kids in college - and the level at which a mother or father dives into a flood to save a drowning child... and it is still moral behavior even when it fails.
 
The next higher level is to work, fight, and sometimes die for a group larger than the unit family - an extended family, a herd, a tribe - and take another look at that baboon on watch; he's at that moral level. I don't think baboon language is complex enough to permit them to discuss such abstract notions as 'morality' or 'duty' or 'loyalty' - but it is evident that baboons DO operate morally and DO exhibit the traits of duty and loyalty; we see them in action. Call it 'instinct' if you like - but remember that assigning a name to a phenomenon does not explain it.
 
But that baboon behavior can be explained in evolutionary terms. Evolution is a process that never stops. Baboons who fail to exhibit moral behavior do not survive; they wind up as meat for leopards. Every baboon generation has to pass this examination in moral behavior; those who bilge it don't have progeny. Perhaps the old bull of the tribe gives lessons... but the leopard decides who graduates - and there is no appeal from his decision. We don't have to understand the details to observe the outcome; baboons behave morally - for baboons.
 
The next level in moral behavior higher than that exhibited by the baboon is that in which duty and loyalty are shown toward a group of your kind too large for an individual to know all of them. We have a name for that. It is called 'patriotism.'
 
Behaving on a still higher moral level were the astronauts who went to the Moon, for their actions tend toward the survival of the entire race of mankind. The door they opened leads to hope that h. sapiens will survive indefinitely long, even longer than this solid planet on which we stand tonight. As a direct result of what they did, it is now possible that the human race will NEVER die. Many short-sighted fools think that going to the Moon was just a stunt. But those astronauts knew the meaning of what they were doing, as is shown by Neil Armstrong's first words in stepping down onto the soil of Luna: 'One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.' Let us note proudly that eleven of the Astronaut Corps are graduates of this our school. And let me add that James Forrestal was the FIRST high-ranking Federal official to come out flatly for space travel.
 
I must pause to brush off those parlor pacifists I mentioned earlier... for they contend that THEIR actions are on this highest moral level. They want to put a stop to war; they say so. Their purpose is to save the human race from killing itself off; they say that too. Anyone who disagrees with them must be a bloodthirsty scoundrel - and they'll tell you that to your face. I won't waste time trying to judge their motives; my criticism is of their mental processes: Their heads aren't screwed on tight. They live in a world of fantasy.
 
Let me stipulate that, if the human race managed its affairs sensibly, we could do without war. Yes - and if pigs had wings, they could fly. I don't know what planet those pious pacifists are talking about but it can't be the third one out from the Sun. Anyone who has seen the Far East - or Africa - or the Middle East - knows or certainly should know that there is NO chance of abolishing war in the foreseeable future. In the past few years I have been around the world three times, traveled in most of the communist countries, visited many of the so-called emerging countries, plus many trips to Europe and to South America; I saw nothing that cheered me as to the prospects for peace. The seeds of war are everywhere; the conflicts of interest are real and deep, and will not be abolished by pious platitudes. The best we can hope for is a precarious balance of power among the nations capable of waging total war - while endless lesser wars break out here and there. I won't belabor this. Our campuses are loaded with custard-headed pacifists but the yard of the Naval Academy is not one place where I will encounter them. We are in agreement that the United States still needs a navy, that the Republic will always have need for heroes - else you would not be here tonight and in uniform.
 
Patriotism - Moral behavior at the national level. Non sibi sed Patria. Nathan Hale's last words: 'I regret that I have but one life to give for my country.' Torpedo Squadron Eight making its suicidal attack. Four chaplains standing fast while the water rises around them. Thomas Jefferson saying, 'The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots'' A submarine skipper giving the order 'Take her DOWN!' while he himself is still topside. Jonas Ingram standing on the steps of Bancroft Hall and shouting, 'The Navy has no place for good losers! The Navy needs tough sons of bitches who can go out there and WIN!'
 
Patriotism - An abstract word used to describe a type of behavior as harshly practical as good brakes and good tires. It means that you place the welfare of your nation ahead of your own even if it costs you your life. Men who go down to the sea in ships have long had another way of expressing the same moral behavior tagged by the abstract expression 'patriotism.' Spelled out in simple Anglo-Saxon words 'Patriotism' reads 'Women and children first!'
 
And that is the moral result of realizing a self-evident biological fact: Men are expendable; women and children are not. A tribe or a nation can lose a high percentage of its men and still pick up the pieces and go on... as long as the women and children are saved. But if you fail to save the women and children, you've had it, you're done, you're THROUGH! You join tyrannosaurus rex, one more breed that bilged its final test.
 
I must amplify that. I know that women can fight and often have. I have known many a tough old grandmother I would rather have on my side in a tight spot than any number of pseudo-males who disdain military service. My wife put in three years of active duty in World War Two, plus ten years reserve, and I am proud - very proud! - of her naval service. I am proud of every one of our women in uniform; they are a shining example to us men.
 
Nevertheless, as a mathematical proposition in the facts of biology, children, and women of child-bearing age, are the ultimate treasure that we must save. Every human culture is based on 'Women and children first' - and any attempt to do it any other way leads quickly to extinction.
 
Possibly extinction is the way we are headed. Great nations have died in the past; it can happen to us. Nor am I certain how good our chances are. To me it seems self-evident that any nation that loses its patriotic fervor is on the skids. Without that indispensable survival factor the end is only a matter of time. I don't know how deeply the rot has penetrated - but it seems to me that there has been a change for the worse in the last fifty years. Possibly I am misled by the offensive behavior of a noisy but unimportant minority. But it does seem to me that patriotism has lost its grip on a large percentage of our people. I hope I am wrong... because if my fears are well grounded, I would not bet two cents on this nation's chance of lasting even to the end of this century. But there is no way to force patriotism on anyone. Passing a law will not create it, nor can we buy it by appropriating so many billions of dollars. You gentlemen of the Brigade are most fortunate. You are going to a school where this basic moral virtue is daily reinforced by precept and example. It is not enough to know what Charlie Noble does for a living, or what makes the wildcat wild, or which BatDiv failed to splice the main brace and why - nor to learn matrix algebra and navigation and ballistics and aerodynamics and nuclear engineering. These things are merely the working tools of your profession and could be learned elsewhere; they do not require 'four years together by the Bay where the Severn joins the tide.'
 
What you do have here is a tradition of service. Your most important classroom is Memorial Hall. Your most important lesson is the way you feel inside when you walk up those steps and see that shot-torn flag framed in the arch of the door: 'Don't Give Up the Ship.' If you feel nothing, you don't belong here. But if it gives you goose flesh just to see that old battle flag, then you are going to find that feeling increasing every time you return here over the years... until it reaches a crescendo the day you return and read the list of your own honored dead - classmates, shipmates, friends - read them with grief and pride while you try to keep your tears silent.
 
The time has come for me to stop. I said that 'Patriotism' is a way of saying 'Women and children first.' And that no one can force a man to feel this way. Instead he must embrace it freely. I want to tell about one such man. He wore no uniform and no one knows his name, or where he came from; all we know is what he did.
 
In my home town sixty years ago when I was a child, my mother and father used to take me and my brothers and sisters out to Swope Park on Sunday afternoons. It was a wonderful place for kids, with picnic grounds and lakes and a zoo. But a railroad line cut straight through it.
 
One Sunday afternoon a young married couple were crossing these tracks. She apparently did not watch her step, for she managed to catch her foot in the frog of a switch to a siding and could not pull it free. Her husband stopped to help her. But try as they might they could not get her foot loose. While they were working at it, a tramp showed up, walking the ties. He joined the husband in trying to pull the young woman's foot loose. No luck.
 
Out of sight around the curve a train whistled. Perhaps there would have been time to run and flag it down, perhaps not. In any case both men went right ahead trying to pull her free... and the train hit them. The wife was killed, the husband was mortally injured and died later, the tramp was killed - and testimony showed that neither man made the slightest effort to save himself. The husband's behavior was heroic... but what we expect of a husband toward his wife: his right, and his proud privilege, to die for his woman. But what of this nameless stranger? Up to the very last second he could have jumped clear. He did not. He was still trying to save this woman he had never seen before in his life, right up to the very instant the train killed him. And that's all we'll ever know about him.
 
THIS is how a man dies. This is how a MAN . . . lives!
 
'They shall not grow old as we that are left grow old;
age shall not wither them nor the years condemn;
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we shall remember them''
 
Quote of the Times;
“How lucky I am to have something that makes saying goodbye so hard.” – A.A. Milne.
 
Link of the Times;
http://imgur.com/gallery/hmE1Q
 
Subscribe or Submit to the Internet's elite source;
Send E-mail to efreem2@alumni.umbc.edu
to complement The Field!
 
Or
 
If you like what you see,
Witness the Archives;
www.SimpleDisorder.com
 
An Images & Ideas, Inc. Service.
 
AOD 318
　
 
 
　
}; - >

Smith goes to see his supervisor in the front office. "Boss," he says, "we're doing some heavy house-cleaning at home tomorrow, and my wife needs me to help with the attic and the garage, moving and hauling stuff."

"We're short-handed, Smith," the boss replies. "I can't give you the day off."

"Thanks, boss," says Smith, "I knew I could count on you!"
 
*.*
 
Kristen gave Sally 3 flowers and 2 stuffed animals. Todd gave Sally 5 flowers and 3 stuffed animals.  What does Sally have?
 
Cancer.
 
*.*
 
True story.
 
MAY 25 - A woman wearing a “Stop Domestic Violence” t-shirt was arrested on domestic violence charges after firing a gun during an argument with her husband inside the couple’s Maine home, police report.
 
Emily Wilson, 38, was collared last week following a confrontation with her spouse Kyle over whether he was having an affair. During the argument, investigators allege, Wilson waved a handgun and fired a shot into the couple’s bed.
 
Wilson, a high school teacher, was subsequently arrested when police responded to a 911 call placed by her husband.
 
*.*
 
FORT EUSTIS, Va. — The Army’s Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) announced today plans to offer a two-mile Walmart scooter ride as an alternate event for the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT).
 
“We’ve been seeking to make the APFT more closely approximate the physical demands required of soldiers in today’s combat environment,” said TRADOC Command Sgt. Maj. David Davenport. “The Walmart scooter ride puts to the test one’s ability to walk minimal distances, transition to and from a seated position, and exercise a modicum of fine motor control, which is all that is required of a majority of soldiers nowadays.”
 
The event will entail parking in a handicap parking space at a local Walmart, walking approximately thirty yards to the entrance, boarding a mobility scooter, navigating a two mile course that winds up and down the aisles, then returning to the parking space.
 
TRADOC has not yet decided which APFT component the scooter ride will replace, though Davenport speculated that the 800-yard swim was the most likely candidate.
 
“I consider the swim to be an inadequate test of preparedness for the modern combat zone, as I can’t remember the last time we deployed to a country that wasn’t parched desert,” said Davenport.
 
*.*
 
At the Battle of Monmouth in June 1778 the weather was hot, over 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Sometime during the battle, William Hays collapsed. As her husband was carried off the battlefield, Mary Hays took his place at the cannon. For the rest of the day, in the heat of battle, Mary continued to "swab and load" the cannon using her husband's ramrod. At one point, a British musket ball or cannonball flew between her legs and tore off the bottom of her skirt. Mary said something to the effect of, "Well, that could have been worse," and went back to loading the cannon.
 
Issue of the Times;
Why Socialism Failed by Mark J. Perry
 
Collectivism Is Based on Faulty Principles
 
Socialism is the Big Lie of the twentieth century. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality was achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery.
 
In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery.
 
A pyramid scheme is ultimately unsustainable because it is based on faulty principles. Likewise, collectivism is unsustainable in the long run because it is a flawed theory. Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.
 
In a capitalist economy, incentives are of the utmost importance. Market prices, the profit-and-loss system of accounting, and private property rights provide an efficient, interrelated system of incentives to guide and direct economic behavior. Capitalism is based on the theory that incentives matter!
 
Under socialism, incentives either play a minimal role or are ignored totally. A centrally planned economy without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize incentives, socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is therefore doomed to fail. Socialism is based on the theory that incentives don’t matter!
 
In a radio debate several months ago with a Marxist professor from the University of Minnesota, I pointed out the obvious failures of socialism around the world in Cuba, Eastern Europe, and China. At the time of our debate, Haitian refugees were risking their lives trying to get to Florida in homemade boats. Why was it, I asked him, that people were fleeing Haiti and traveling almost 500 miles by ocean to get to the “evil capitalist empire” when they were only 50 miles from the “workers’ paradise” of Cuba?
 
The Marxist admitted that many “socialist” countries around the world were failing. However, according to him, the reason for failure is not that socialism is deficient, but that the socialist economies are not practicing “pure” socialism. The perfect version of socialism would work; it is just the imperfect socialism that doesn’t work. Marxists like to compare a theoretically perfect version of socialism with practical, imperfect capitalism which allows them to claim that socialism is superior to capitalism.
 
If perfection really were an available option, the choice of economic and political systems would be irrelevant. In a world with perfect beings and infinite abundance, any economic or political system–socialism, capitalism, fascism, or communism–would work perfectly.
 
However, the choice of economic and political institutions is crucial in an imperfect universe with imperfect beings and limited resources. In a world of scarcity it is essential for an economic system to be based on a clear incentive structure to promote economic efficiency. The real choice we face is between imperfect capitalism and imperfect socialism. Given that choice, the evidence of history overwhelmingly favors capitalism as the greatest wealth-producing economic system available.
 
The strength of capitalism can be attributed to an incentive structure based upon the three Ps: (1) prices determined by market forces, (2) a profit-and-loss system of accounting and (3) private property rights. The failure of socialism can be traced to its neglect of these three incentive-enhancing components.
 
Prices
 
The price system in a market economy guides economic activity so flawlessly that most people don’t appreciate its importance. Market prices transmit information about relative scarcity and then efficiently coordinate economic activity. The economic content of prices provides incentives that promote economic efficiency.
 
For example, when the OPEC cartel restricted the supply of oil in the 1970s, oil prices rose dramatically. The higher prices for oil and gasoline transmitted valuable information to both buyers and sellers. Consumers received a strong, clear message about the scarcity of oil by the higher prices at the pump and were forced to change their behavior dramatically. People reacted to the scarcity by driving less, carpooling more, taking public transportation, and buying smaller cars. Producers reacted to the higher price by increasing their efforts at exploration for more oil. In addition, higher oil prices gave producers an incentive to explore and develop alternative fuel and energy sources.
 
The information transmitted by higher oil prices provided the appropriate incentive structure to both buyers and sellers. Buyers increased their effort to conserve a now more precious resource and sellers increased their effort to find more of this now scarcer resource.
 
The only alternative to a market price is a controlled or fixed price which always transmits misleading information about relative scarcity. Inappropriate behavior results from a controlled price because false information has been transmitted by an artificial, non-market price.
 
Look at what happened during the 1970s when U.S. gas prices were controlled. Long lines developed at service stations all over the country because the price for gasoline was kept artificially low by government fiat. The full impact of scarcity was not accurately conveyed. As Milton Friedman pointed out at the time, we could have eliminated the lines at the pump in one day by allowing the price to rise to clear the market.
 
From our experience with price controls on gasoline and the long lines at the pump and general inconvenience, we get an insight into what happens under socialism where every price in the economy is controlled. The collapse of socialism is due in part to the chaos and inefficiency that result from artificial prices. The information content of a controlled price is always distorted. This in turn distorts the incentives mechanism of prices under socialism. Administered prices are always either too high or too low, which then creates constant shortages and surpluses. Market prices are the only way to transmit information that will create the incentives to ensure economic efficiency.
 
Profits and Losses
 
Socialism also collapsed because of its failure to operate under a competitive, profit-and-loss system of accounting. A profit system is an effective monitoring mechanism which continually evaluates the economic performance of every business enterprise. The firms that are the most efficient and most successful at serving the public interest are rewarded with profits. Firms that operate inefficiently and fail to serve the public interest are penalized with losses.
 
By rewarding success and penalizing failure, the profit system provides a strong disciplinary mechanism which continually redirects resources away from weak, failing, and inefficient firms toward those firms which are the most efficient and successful at serving the public. A competitive profit system ensures a constant reoptimization of resources and moves the economy toward greater levels of efficiency. Unsuccessful firms cannot escape the strong discipline of the marketplace under a profit/loss system. Competition forces companies to serve the public interest or suffer the consequences.
 
Under central planning, there is no profit-and-loss system of accounting to accurately measure the success or failure of various programs. Without profits, there is no way to discipline firms that fail to serve the public interest and no way to reward firms that do. There is no efficient way to determine which programs should be expanded and which ones should be contracted or terminated.
 
Without competition, centrally planned economies do not have an effective incentive structure to coordinate economic activity. Without incentives the results are a spiraling cycle of poverty and misery. Instead of continually reallocating resources towards greater efficiency, socialism falls into a vortex of inefficiency and failure.
 
Private Property Rights
 
A third fatal defect of socialism is its blatant disregard for the role of private property rights in creating incentives that foster economic growth and development. The failure of socialism around the world is a “tragedy of commons” on a global scale.
 
The “tragedy of the commons” refers to the British experience of the sixteenth century when certain grazing lands were communally owned by villages and were made available for public use. The land was quickly overgrazed and eventually became worthless as villagers exploited the communally owned resource.
 
When assets are publicly owned, there are no incentives in place to encourage wise stewardship. While private property creates incentives for conservation and the responsible use of property, public property encourages irresponsibility and waste. If everyone owns an asset, people act as if no one owns it. And when no one owns it, no one really takes care of it. Public ownership encourages neglect and mismanagement.
 
Since socialism, by definition, is a system marked by the “common ownership of the means of production,” the failure of socialism is a “tragedy of the commons” on a national scale. Much of the economic stagnation of socialism can be traced to the failure to establish and promote private property rights.
 
As Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto remarked, you can travel in rural communities around the world and you will hear dogs barking, because even dogs understand property rights. It is only statist governments that have failed to understand property rights. Socialist countries are just now starting to recognize the importance of private property as they privatize assets and property in Eastern Europe.
 
Incentives Matter
 
Without the incentives of market prices, profit-and-loss accounting, and well-defined property rights, socialist economies stagnate and wither. The economic atrophy that occurs under socialism is a direct consequence of its neglect of economic incentives.
 
No bounty of natural resources can ever compensate a country for its lack of an efficient system of incentives. Russia, for example, is one of the world’s wealthiest countries in terms of natural resources; it has some of the world’s largest reserves of oil, natural gas, diamonds, and gold. Its valuable farm land, lakes, rivers, and streams stretch across a land area that encompasses 11 time zones. Yet Russia remains poor. Natural resources are helpful, but the ultimate resources of any country are the unlimited resources of its people–human resources.
 
By their failure to foster, promote, and nurture the potential of their people through incentive-enhancing institutions, centrally planned economies deprive the human spirit of full development. Socialism fails because it kills and destroys the human spirit–just ask the people leaving Cuba in homemade rafts and boats.
 
As the former centrally planned economies move toward free markets, capitalism, and democracy, they look to the United States for guidance and support during the transition. With an unparalleled 250-year tradition of open markets and limited government, the United States is uniquely qualified to be the guiding light in the worldwide transition to freedom and liberty.
 
We have an obligation to continue to provide a framework of free markets and democracy for the global transition to freedom. Our responsibility to the rest of the world is to continue to fight the seductiveness of statism around the world and here at home. The seductive nature of statism continues to tempt and lure us into the Barmecidal illusion that the government can create wealth.
 
The temptress of socialism is constantly luring us with the offer: “give up a little of your freedom and I will give you a little more security.” As the experience of this century has demonstrated, the bargain is tempting but never pays off. We end up losing both our freedom and our security.
 
Programs like socialized medicine, welfare, Social Security, and minimum wage laws will continue to entice us because on the surface they appear to be expedient and beneficial. Those programs, like all socialist programs, will fail in the long run regardless of initial appearances. These programs are part of the Big Lie of socialism because they ignore the important role of incentives.
 
Socialism will remain a constant temptation. We must be vigilant in our fight against socialism not only around the globe but also here in the United States.
 
The failure of socialism inspired a worldwide renaissance of freedom and liberty. For the first time in the history of the world, the day is coming very soon when a majority of the people in the world will live in free societies or societies rapidly moving toward freedom.
 
Capitalism will play a major role in the global revival of liberty and prosperity because it nurtures the human spirit, inspires human creativity, and promotes the spirit of enterprise. By providing a powerful system of incentives that promote thrift, hard work, and efficiency, capitalism creates wealth.
 
The main difference between capitalism and socialism is this: Capitalism works.
 
Mark J. Perry is a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a professor of economics and finance at the University of Michigan’s Flint campus.
 
Quote of the Times;
Wow, USA Today did todays cover story on my record in lawsuits. Verdict: 450 wins, 38 losses. Isn’t that what you want for your president? – Trump
 
Link of the Times;
http://www.simpledisorder.com/the-comic/the-archive
 
Subscribe or Submit to the Internet's elite source;
Send E-mail to efreem2@alumni.umbc.edu
to complement The Field!
 
Or
 
Follow me on Twitter: @aod318
 
Or
 
If you like what you see,
Witness the Archives;
www.SimpleDisorder.com
 
An Images & Ideas, Inc. Service.
 
AOD 318
　
 
 
　
}; - >