The Danger of the Misconception

RELIGION, PARTY POLITICS, GOVERNMENT:  DO AMERICANS ACCEPT THE “STATUS QUO?”

by Dr. Thomas E. Davis, Colonel, USA (Ret), ©2016

(Aug. 8, 2016) — First, precisely, what is a misconception? Most Americans understand the meaning of the word.  However, I will refine the term “misconception” by the use of synonyms. A misconception is clearly a misunderstanding, misinterpretation, a fallacy, or a delusion. There exist numerous “misconceptions,” any of which pose a real and palpable danger to the United States.

The primary misconception facing the United States is that of Islam. The sane world has been led to believe that Islam is a religion when nothing could be farther from the truth! A religion is, by nature and by intent, a belief in a power greater than humanity. The power resides in an essence, i.e., “something that exists, especially a spiritual or immaterial entity” which humankind has recognized, perceived and perpetuated as the “Creator” of the Universe and all it contains.

Essential to this concept or belief system is the exclusivity or proprietorship of the Creator; this belief system denies any mutual or cooperative planning or execution in this venture that has been in existence for over 13.8 Billion years. Biblically, historically and cognitively, this is both logical and epistemiologically sound. The scholars of the Bible had in their midst men so holy that God spoke directly to them. All has been recounted in the Old Testament, most particularly in the Pentateuch.

No such claim can be made for Islam. Its prime mover was nothing more and nothing less than a snake-oil salesman on the order of Jim Jones, the murderer of Guyana, or David Koresh, the phony prophet of Waco, and these only scratch the surface. There are so many more, and of these, Islam is the most dangerous. Check the link:  http://www.businesspundit.com/15-religious-swindles-that-shame-the-holy-name/

One small bit of “Looking into the swindler of Mecca” will lead the reader to a far different opinion of Islam and its founder as just another, albeit much earlier, scammer the Jones, Koresh and others. Let us take a quick look at the supreme deity of Islam or of the Mussulmen, or Mohammedanism. That deity is one “Allah.”  Allah was the “Moon God of Mecca” and likely the only name of a so-called deity known to Muhammad.

That Muhammad was clever, as in “cunning,” “egghead,” “foxy” or “inventive,” all the abilities to be the perfect “con-artist,” is apparent.  Muhammad was fully aware of the “Oral Tradition” which substituted for newspapers or books for the dissemination of information in the 7^th Century AD.

There were Israelites and Jews among the nomadic traders plying their wares throughout the Arabian Peninsula at the time of the Annunciation, and the birth of Jesus Christ would have been well-known. For an orphan and “smart kid,” the stage was set for the coup of a new “religion” with this “mystically”-possessed man as its leader.

Thus was born Islam with its inevitable followers primed to cash in. Muhammad got greedy, which made his friends, neighbors and followers angry. They put a price on his head, and he and several “believers” fled to Medina and set up a new seat of Islam. From this haven, Muhammad and his crew of caravan-raiders preyed upon passing caravans.

That, in a nutshell, is a brief history of the misconception that Islam is a bona fide religion. It is the most widespread murder ring, making the Sicilian Mafia appear to be akin to tipping over outside toilets by pranksters on Halloween.

Another blatantly false misconception is that this nation is a democracy and by extrapolation, that the Democrat Party is therefore the political party that best represents the people. WRONG; “democracy” is derived from the Greek word for “people,” demos. The philosopher Plato made perfect sense when he noted that a democracy is unworkable outside a small, circumscribed area such as a village or town. In such a setting the ‘demos’ can, by town hall meetings on some regular basis, provide a satisfactory government locally. Plain common sense leads one to the unalterable conclusion that a purely democratic government will not long serve the needs of a Republic or even a state.

Our 55 Founding Fathers, all students of Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch, Robespierre, Montesquieu, John Locke and so forth, departed from the usual monarchical, dictatorial, imperialistic forms of national government. They devised a system intended to divide the government of this nation between and reliant upon the several states and a central or national tripartite federal government.

But for the criminal machinations of party politics and the failure of the central government in its oversight responsibilities, we would and should have stayed the course as a Judeo-Christian-led and God-inspired Republic.

Though all the Founders, to the best of my knowledge, were adamantly opposed to the notion of political parties, a difference of opinion existed between President Washington’s Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, a staunch Federalist and a prime mover in the effort to get the new Constitution ratified, and Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. It must be noted that the Federalists were not a political party as we know them to be; rather, they were all believers in the Federalist form of government that has a specific meaning. Under this form of government, power and authority are allocated between the national and local government units.  http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Federalism

Despite their opposition, Jefferson and Madison formed a political entity. In United States history, the Democratic-Republican Party, the Republican Party or the Jeffersonian Republicans was a political party organized by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1791-93, which opposed the Federalist Party and controlled the Presidency, Congress and most states, from 1801 to 1825, during the First Party System.  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic-Republican_Party

It is quite obvious that the use of the word “Democrat” implied Jefferson and Madison’s limited meaning of “agrarian” rather than “demos.” Both Jefferson and Madison were fearful of “big” government, and rightly so, while the Federalists favored a strong central government.

The presidential election of 1828 settled the issue to the detriment of this republic. The supporters of Andrew Jackson purloined the Democratic portion of the Jefferson-Madison unintended gaffe. They became the Jacksonian Democrats, won a landslide victory and instituted the “spoils,” or patronage, system which persists to this very day.

Party politics, the patronage or “spoils” system brings us full circle, right back to another “misconception.” One would think that party politics should be benign rather than fatally malignant. There are those party politicians who insist that since there are bound to be opposing views to any political position, there must be a party of choice for the differing opinions.  If that were true, and it is NOT, we would not have more than two parties rather than a plethora of parties or platforms or soap boxes.

As of April 2016, there were at least 28 distinct ballot-qualified political parties in the United States. There were 214 state-level parties. Some parties are recognized in multiple states. For example, both the Democrat Party and the Republican Party are recognized in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. These two parties account for 102 of the 214 total state-level parties. https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States

There now arises another misconception. Who sets the rules for the workload of the Congress, the Executive branch and the Judiciary? Would it surprise you to know that each sets its own work schedule? This is just the polar opposite of that which should be expected from our employees. Our federal legislature works about 120 days out of an entire year and its members compensated in salary they set to the tune of a MINIMUM of $174,000 per year, or about $1,450 per day, plus fringe benefits PLUS ALL the fat they can throw into their own coffers by the use of PACs and Leadership PACS. It is by far the biggest scam going on in the United States today.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in this writer’s opinion, is either over-staffed, under-employed of just downright criminally indolent, apathetic, and/or negligent. Why would I denigrate these judges so harshly? Simple: “The Court receives approximately 7,000-8,000 petitions for a writ of certiorari each Term.  The Court grants and hears oral argument in about 80 cases.” https://www.supremecourt.gov/faq.aspx

USLegal.com states that “a writ of certiorari is an order a higher court issues in order to review the decision and proceedings in a lower court and determine whether there were any irregularities.”

When the Court is sitting, public sessions begin promptly at 10 a.m. and continue until 3 p.m., with a one-hour lunch recess starting at noon. No public sessions are held on Thursdays or Fridays. https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/procedures.aspx

For a guaranteed lifetime position, this appears to be another hugely over-compensated feeding spot at the hog trough.

Now for the biggest offender, the obnoxious chief executive. He receives $400,000 per year in salary plus a $50,000 expense account and hires at government pay rates a virtual army of aides, assistants, advisors and other A’s. In the case of Obama, his consist of far too many of questionable allegiance to the United States in keeping with his own lack of qualifications. Furthermore, there is apparently no limit to the number of vacation days he is permitted; he surely is NOT overburdened with labor.

This bring us to the final misconception for this piece. Our employees act more like their royal highnesses; we are expected to address them as the “Honorable” so and so when as a matter of fact, most are NOT honorable by a long shot. ALL are opposed to impeaching a treasonous president, all are obviously satisfied with the status quo and ALL are going to sink with the good ship USA!

I hate to appear vitriolic, but so many misconceptions in so few paragraphs are mightily irksome to this old man.