Multipurpose: Thoughts on the 12 Gauge

 

This post will be different from my normal ones, as it concerns practical advice instead of ideology. As a patriot, homesteader, and plain old country boy, I long ago made my acquaintance with the ubiquitous weapon of rural folk in America –the 12 gauge shotgun. I think I shot my first one when I was around 10 years old.

The shotgun has its limitations, but within those limits it is highly useful. The shotgun moves a huge amount of lead downrange at velocities higher than those of a pistol, but much lower than modern (post 1890) rifle calibers.

The 12 gauge is the most common caliber, though there are also 20, 16, 28 and 410 gauge shotguns out there. Most military and police shotguns are 12 gauges, and so are most of the ones that guys I know own. A 12 gauge has an approximately .70 caliber bore diameter.

Shotgun shells, and shotgun chambers, come in different lengths. The 2 ¾ inch is the standard length of 12 gauge shells, though many modern guns have a 3 inch chamber. Birdshot normally comes in the standard 2 ¾ length; buckshot and slugs are sometimes also available in 3 and 3 ½ inch lengths.

The shotgun can be loaded with three basic types of ammunition: birdshot, buckshot, and slugs. Let us examine them. Birdshot comes in a variety of sizes. Birdshot is simply a very fine (smaller than a bb from a bb gun) shot that is useful for three things: (1) birds and light skinned small animals, (2) shooting clay pigeons/disks, and (3) playing around on the range. As the shot column spreads out it forms the pattern. The tiny pellets lose velocity rapidly, and do not penetrate deeply. Birdshot is not appropriate for large game! Likewise, birdshot is of little use on a human opponent past 5 yards; it will create a nasty but not necessarily incapacitating wound.

Buckshot is the primary antipersonnel load of shotguns. Buckshot comes in a variety of (large) sizes. The most common buck size employed is 00. In a standard 2 ¾ inch length 12 gauge shell, 00 Buck consists of nine .33 caliber pellets –often collectively weighing an ounce and moving at 1,300fps! That my friends, is as effective as a three round burst from a 9mm submachinegun.

Slugs come in two varieties: rifled and sabot. A rifled slug, such as the classic Brenekke pattern, is just a huge (roughly 70 caliber) chunk of lead weighing an ounce or so cruising downrange much faster than a 45ACP round. Sabot slugs are below bore diameter, are enclosed in a two piece plastic jacket (sabot), and are driven to higher velocities than rifled slugs on account of their lighter weight.

There is a fourth load occasionally encountered: buck and ball. I have read that buck and ball, which is a single relatively large lead ball on top of several small buckshot pellets was commonly used in smoothbore muzzleloaders and muskets in early America. I have fired some modern 12 guage loads made in Italy for the Centurion brand and consisting of one 65 caliber ball and six #1 Buck pellets. Not bad.

There are three basic types of barrels for shotguns: choked, rifled, and cylinder bore. A choke barrel has a constriction, often screw in interchangeable, in the end of the barrel to squeeze down the shot column for a tighter pattern. A rifle barrel is rifled, just like a rifle or pistol barrel, and is designed to fire a sabot slug –and nothing else. If a few bore diameter lead “rifled” slugs or loads of shot are put through a rifled barrel, it will leave a noticeable lead deposit –that is a pain to clean out. A cylinder bore is a straight pipe, and can fire any type of load –slug, buck, or birdshot. Cylinder bore is the preferred choice for a combat shotgun.

Modern pump guns, like the Remington 870 and Mossberg 500, often come with interchangeable barrels that an average operator can switch without special tools or gauges or worrying about headspace -unlike with rifles (where headspace is a BIG deal).

My personal shotgun is a Remington 870 in 12 gauge, with a 3 inch chamber. I normally fire only 2 ¾ inch ammo in it. I have three factory barrels for it: a bead sight vent rib choke barrel, a rifled barrel with open sights, and a bead sight cylinder bore. The cylinder bore sets on it as I write this. It is within arm’s reach, and is loaded with 00 Buck.

On final note about barrels is, do not saw your own barrel off! Federal law mandates a minimum barrel length of 18 inches. A short barrel is nice for defense; buy a factory one. You can buy factory barrels in the 18 to 20 inch range; do so. If you cut off your barrel, a crooked cop can cut it off even shorter and claim that you did it -a felony. All my barrels are factory spec and of legal length. You also would lose your end bead/sight if you cut your barrel off –not a good thing.

Also, if someone tries to get you to cut your shotgun off below the legal limit, or help them to do so with theirs, assume that they are either an idiot of a fed. Remember Randy Weaver’s entrapment.

Now that we have covered the basics, on to usage. You will want to do most of your target practice with birdshot. Birdshot is the least expensive load, and recoils much less than buck or slugs. Buck and slugs recoil/kick significantly –much more than a 308 battle rifle.

Knox Industries makes two types of recoil reducing stocks for pump shotguns, one sporter styled and one tactical styled. (My 870 has the sporter style on it). They allow the front of the buttstock to compress into the rear/buttpad area of the stock, absorbing significant recoil.

I have read, from multiple good sources, that a combat shotgun is benefited by having a “ghost ring” aperture rear sight. I do not doubt this, but have not personally tested it.

What barrel or barrels you own, and what ammo you use, will depend on your personal situation. Someone who is nothing but a bird hunter needs nothing but a barrel with screw in chokes. Someone who is nothing but a deer hunter in an eastern state must have either a cylinder bore or rifled barrel to fire slugs.

Someone who is primarily interested in defense will do just fine with nothing but a cylinder bore. I have all three, but rarely use anything but the cylinder bore. The cylinder bore is the most versatile, but gives no pattern tightening constriction and also decreases the range at which a slug will be effectively accurate (compared to a rifled bore).

A shotgun slug has major stopping power –at close range. Think of it as giant pistol. The shotgun is somewhat akin to the smoothbore muskets of American Revolution vintage. But it has high recoil, comparatively short range, and low magazine capacity (normally 5 or less rounds, unless one buys a tube extension). An open sight shotgun firing a lead rifled slug is best used at ranges under 100 yards. While an optically sighted, rifled barrel, sabot slug firing shotgun might double that range –it is a far cry from what a 30-06 will do.

If you are defensive minded, and perhaps even preparing for the looters that will swarm the earth after a major economic or social collapse, then you had better stockpile a bit of 00 Buck.

Because of its limited range and lack of penetration of body armor and masonry barriers, the shotgun has basically zero military utility. This is why the shotgun is the last weapon regulated by oppressive governments.

Also to be considered is that a shoulder fired weapon is easier to fire accurately than a pistol, because of the three points of contact with the firer’s body. This can be very important if you want someone who is basically a non-shooter, such as your wife, to be able to accurately engage a threat. But, there is still the recoil or a non-shooter to deal with.

Years ago I read an experienced combat shotgunner, the late Louis Awerbuck, state that the same load will pattern different between different shotguns –even those of the same barrel length and choke configuration! Also note that different loads will often pattern different from the same barrel. I recall that several years ago I found Czech Sellier&Bellot 00 buck patterned MUCH wider from my Rem. 870 than American made Winchester 00 buck.

For my own education, and that of my readers, I decided to do a formal test. I acquired four different loads of standard 2 ¾ inch length 00 Buck from four different makers. These loads were Remington (1325fps), Federal “Power Shok” (1325fps), Winchester Ranger “Low Recoil” (1145fps), and Rio’s Royal Buck (1345fps). The Rio was made in Spain; the other three are American.

I got out eight cheap nine inch paper plates and went to my range on the homestead. I had the cylinder bore barrel on my 870. I fired two rounds of each of my loads, one round per plate, from 10 yards distance. I examined the plates and chose the best group of the two for each of the four loads. On a scale of 9/9, the best Winchester group went 6/9, the best Federal 8/9, the best Remington 5/9 (with a 6th nick), and the best Rio 7/9. In addition to number of pellets on the plate, group size varied.

00buckplates10yards

Then I took the same gun/barrel and four rounds, and did this test on fresh plates with one round each at 15 yards. Results degraded. The Winchester went 4/9, the Federal 6/9, the Remington 1/9, and the Rio 6/9. Yes, the Remington only put one of the nine pellets on the plate.

On this 15 yard test, I shot the Winchester load first, before the IDPA target my paper plates was stapled to was shot to pieces with little holes, and noted that the Winchester put 3 in the plate (roughly over the 8 inch A zone), 3 in the C zone, and 3 in the D zone.

00buckplates15yards

A few days later, I put my 25 inch ventilated rib barrel with screw in choke on my 870, and reshot the 10 yard portion of this test on eight fresh plates. As I was using a barrel with a choke, I expected better patterns. The best Winchester went 9/9, the best Federal 6/9, the best Remington 9/9, and the best Rio 9/9.

00buckplateschokebarrel10yards

I then patched up my IDPA silhouette target, taped a fresh paper plate over the A zone, and shot it with one round of Federal 00 from approximately 25 yards using the choke barrel. It put 6 of the pellets on the silhouette, but only 1 on the paper plate.

Two things surprised me from these recent tests. First was that the quality of group of the same load occasionally varied widely from the same barrel and range. An example of this was the Rio from the choke barrel at 10 yards. In contrast the Winchester did very well with two tight 9/9 patterns from the choke barrel at 10 yards. The second surprise was how poorly the Remington performed from my gun.

For several reasons, the Winchester Ranger “Low Recoil” is my preferred 00 buck load. And of course, these are not the only buck loads from these manufactures, and there are other manufacturers. Test your own gun with several loads and learn before you make your load selection.

The shotgun is not some kind of sci-fi death ray. You can completely miss with a shotgun and buckshot if you flinch; I personally saw another guy do this once. A shotgun must be aimed, not pointed! Shotguns patterns are not as wide as you might believe from viewing movies. At ranges past 15 yards, a perfect center shot might not place every pellet on the threat, a shotgun must be employed carefully if there are bystanders. In summary, if you are fighting outside of a building, you will almost always be better off with a rifle.

The shotgun is a great tool for the homesteader, survivalist, and home defender. It is a rather poor paramilitary weapon.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Advertisements

Losing the Supreme Court?

There has been some angst on the internet recently concerning what might happen to the U.S. Supreme Court if Hillary Clinton were elected president and given the opportunity to appoint more liberal justices (aka judges). Let us take a look at his theory.

First of all, the supreme Court was established by the U.S. Constitution. The “s” of supreme was not capitalized in the document, but the “C” in Court was. It was the highest federal court, but it was not a god. There also was provision made for the creation of inferior Federal courts. The Constitution does not grant the supreme Court jurisdiction over all areas, or say that it has the last word on Constitutional interpretation. Furthermore, the Congress can remove supreme Court jurisdiction in certain areas. Go read Article 3.

The justices of the supreme Court were to be appointed for life, to guard against them being influenced in their opinions by running for election periodically. In theory, they were supposed to be above petty politics. While the number of justices was not specified by the Constitution, it became customary to have nine. This gave a tie breaking vote. There are 8 justices, and 1 chief justice.

The supreme Court was under executive siege under the socialist traitor Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The supreme Court was not fully cooperating with all cases regarding F.D.R.’s openly socialist New Deal programs. They were roughly divided as: 4 conservatives, 3 liberals (including Louis P. Brandeis), and 2 swing votes.  (Note: Brandeis was the first Jew appointed to the supreme Court, a and was an ardent Zionist. See the cover photo of him and Rabbi Wise on Alison Weir’s book Against Our Better Judgement).

In 1937 F.D.R. introduced a legislative scheme to appoint six new justices to the supreme Court, in addition to the nine current ones. This would have given him a pro-socialist majority that would rubber stamp him if anyone dared challenge his unconstitutional laws.

One justice, John Owen Roberts, perhaps to “save” the integrity of the Court, switched his vote to support the F.D.R. position. The court was intact numerically, but ceased to defend the Constitution.

Why do we still have Roe v. Wade, ObamaCare, any gun control laws, or the Patriot Act? Because the black robed supreme Court justices, who have been derisively termed “clown in gowns”, will either not hear/grant cert to cases, or will ignore the strict construction of the Founders.

The case regarding ObamaCare would have been a 4-4 tie, except that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. sided with the pro-ObamaCare justices. Yes, Chief Justice Roberts that was appointed by the last Republican president, George W. Bush, voted to uphold ObamaCare. I find it particularly interesting that his name is John Roberts, just as was the man who flipped in F.D.R.’s time was. Bizarre.

With the death and vacancy of “conservative” Roman Catholic justice Antonin Scalia, the court is temporarily down to eight members. The religious breakdown is five Roman Catholics and three Jews. The ethnic breakdown of the five Catholics is: 1 Negro, 1 Latina, and three white guys. Obama’s nomination to replace the deceased Scalia, which Congress did not act on, was Merrick Garland –a Jew. Does it not seem a tad strange that in a country settled and legally founded almost exclusively by western European Protestants, that there is not a single ethnically European Protestant male on the Court?

To lose control of the supreme Court implies that we currently control it. We cannot lose the supreme Court, because we have already lost it.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Thoughts on Separation

 

As I reflected on yesterday’s post, I decided to clarify my position further. I have written about this in depth in the 10 page essay titled Multiculturalism: Death of the American People in my August 2016 print book As America Fades. I stand behind that essay today.

In my multiculturalism essay in my book, I argued that there were Biblical, historical, and biological reasons why the races should not mix/intermarry. I also made the argument that people groups are the foundation and true definition of nations, and should have their own territory. I also pointed out that America’s Founding Fathers wanted America to be a free white republic. I stand by those assertions. I am a White Nationalist. I hold that racial separation is compatible with both the Bible and the U.S. Constitution.

In yesterday’s blog post on the 14 Words, I stated that I am not a Nazi. Let me clarify. Nazi is short for National Socialist, and was the philosophy of the German NSDAP and the Third Reich. I am not any variant of socialist; however I am a nationalist and a racial nationalist. The term Nazi entails far more than just racial separation. I wish to live in a country where citizens enjoy greater liberty than in NS Germany. That being said, unlike mainstream Americans, I do not view NS Germany as the absolute embodiment of evil or tyranny, and I do not believe the official story/fantasy about what I sarcastically refer to as The Most Holy Number 6 Million.

The concept of the separation and integrity of the various races of man long predated Hitler and the NSDAP. Racial separation was once widely understood by Christians –from early America to the antebellum South to the Boers of South Africa. Advocating separation does not mean one hates all others; it means love for one’s own.

Ethno nationalism allows all nations to govern their affairs and live out their culture as they see fit. It does not mean that one race, nation, or state rules another. It does not connote slavery or repression. It just means that we would be better off if we live and married among our own, in our own separate countries.     

     In truth, I believe physical separation is necessary. When the races dwell together, a certain portion of the population will forget their ancestral heritage and debase themselves. Barring strict legal prohibition with stiff penalties, which I would rather not see, coworkers and neighbors will become friends –and friends will become lovers. We need separate countries. I do not support the proposition nation fantasy/ modern tower of Babel being built in America today.

Except for the negro slaves, which should not have ever been brought here, America was basically a white country before 1865. America is destroying herself, just as every multiracial society inevitably does. Diversity is not strength. Ever increasing diversity is an ever widening crack that will eventually cause the structure to fail.

A multicultural society will inevitably end in race mixing into one brown race, or in extreme violence –with one race victorious and the other enslaved or annihilated. Thomas Jefferson warned us of this in his 1782 book Notes on the State of Virginia. Peaceful separation is far preferable to mongrelization or race war.

Many Christians will point to the scripture that all men are of one blood. In Acts 17:26 we read Paul speak to the Athenians the following words: “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation”. Read that verse carefully. While this verse acknowledges a common origin of man, it clearly states that there are different nations (peoples) who have “bounds” of habitations. Acts 17:26 actually defends the concepts of (1) different races, (2) racial separation, and (3) ethno nationalism.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Reexamining the 14 Words

 

My regular readers have no doubt noted that I have been closing each of my blog posts with the slogan “Remember the Founders and the 14 Words”. The 14 Words are “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children”. While I support the concept of the phrase, I probably should not have used it for reasons detailed in this essay.

I had someone that I commented to on the comments section of a news site ask me what the 14 Words were. This spurred me into some more research.

First, I did not coin this phrase. I first came across the 14 Words two or so years ago. I learned that they were coined by a man named David Eden Lane (1938-2007). David Lane was involved in some activities, regarding white revolution, that landed him in Federal prison, where he died. Lane was also a Wotanist. The 14 Words are so commonplace among white nationalists that they often do not attribute Lane every time when quoted –they “just are”.

I knew about David Lane’s affiliation with The Order and Wotnaism when I used the 14 Words on this blog, which is why I purposefully did not mention him. I am a Christian and I do not in any way support Lane’s Wotnaism or criminal activities. I am not a follower of Lane. But I thought his often quoted 14 Words were clear and beautiful.

I am aware that some people use an abbreviated slogan 14-88, or 14/88. The 14 is the 14 Words. I understand that the 88 can stand for two things: (1) a covert way of saying Hial Hitler (88= double h /8th letter of alphabet) and (2) the 88 principles of David Lane. I have never read Lane’s 88 principle statement. Once again, as I have not read Lane and am not a Nazi, I chose to simply use the 14 Words without mentioning Lane or the 88 part.

While doing further research into Lane over the weekend, I came across a site claiming to be in memorial to Lane and his (now non-existent) group  Der Bruder Schweigen. On this site, under an article titled The 14 Words Decoded, a man claiming to have been a personal friend of David Lane, one Baldursson, claims that the 14 Words were more than a mere racial/political statement. He claims that they are some kind of English language Gematria/numerical value of letters/ holy Wotan code. Whoa. I did not know that. Basically, this appears to be some sort of an Aryan take on the occultic Jewish Kabbalah -which is also referenced by high level, post 1865 Freemasons.   

     This website also had articles, allegedly by the late Lane, titled The Prophecy and The Pyramid Prophecy Introduction. They dealt with the great pyramid of Giza, the Great Seal of the United States, the dates 1776 and 1938, Solomon’s temple, the Egyptian sun god, heresies concerning the translation of the Bible, and more letter value number games. Apparently, Lane (1) did not understand that the KJV 1611 Bible was translated from original language manuscripts copied from the originals (not written by {secret Ayran} mystery encoders), (2) does not believe that Jesus Christ was a real person, (3) and believes that a man (him) was prophesied over 300 years in advance by the encoders -to fight the beast on behalf of his race.  

     I did not realize he believed all this bizarre stuff when I quoted his saying. I would guess that many people who use it do not know this about it, or at least do not believe it to be accurate theory.

I feel no need to only quote other Christians. Even the apostle Paul quoted a (presumably Greek pagan) man about the Cretans in the New Testament. However, since it appears that Lane coined the 14 Words with an Aryanized Kabballah number game in mind, I am no longer going to us it to close my blog posts.

My apologies for not doing more research before I used it.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Who Was “Colonel” House?

 

This article may seem a bit esoteric to my readers. Who was Colonel Edward Mandell house, and why should present day Americans care?

I have read a bit about House in the books of Eustace Mullins, G. Edward Griffin, and John V. Denson –along with doing some online research. This little essay is sort of a brief intro into who he was, and why his wicked name should be remembered.

Edward Mandell House was born in Texas in 1858. His father was extremely wealthy. Edward’s father owned large amounts of land, in addition to being a banker. Edward attended Cornell University, something most Texas ranch boys never dreamed of. The rank of “Colonel” was honorary; he was never a soldier. Eventually Edward used his wealth to gain great influence –if not control- over the governorship of the state of Texas. Around 1902 he moved to New York City, and the story gets more significant…

House became active in national politics, and became a close advisor to Woodrow Wilson. After Wilson was elected president, House declined official political office, but had quarters in the White House so that he might advise Wilson from behind the scenes. Recall that this was the period in which America got the 16th and 17th Amendments, and the Federal Reserve.

The Texas boy House was familiar with Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff, and Fabian Socialists. Not exactly a cowboy.

House was involved in behind the scenes negotiations with Great Britain concerning potential America entry into WWI, and likely had foreknowledge of the sinking of the Lusitania, as did a young F.D.R. and Winston Churchill. House was deeply involved in the negotiations of the Versailles Treaty at the close of WWI, and advocated for U.S. membership in the League of Nations.

House also (anonymously) wrote a novel titled Philip Dru, Administrator a book that presented a scenario where a man becomes the dictator of the former U.S.A. and institutes all manner of communist “reforms”. Some of these reforms documented by Eustace Mullins include: “the enactment of the graduated income tax, excess profits tax, unemployment insurance, social security, and a flexible currency system”. Basically, this is stuff straight out of the Communist Manifesto; of course, most of this stuff is currently supported by both the Democrat and Republican parties.

In the Biographies end section of my 1993 hardcover edition of Eustace Mullins The Secrets Of The Federal Reserve, Mullins describes House as: “Son of a Rothschild agent in Texas. Succeeded in electing five consecutive governors of Texas; became Woodrow Wilson’s advisor in 1912. Cooperated with Paul Warburg to get the Federal Reserve Act passed by Congress in 1913”. Furthermore, Mullins reports that Rabbi Stephen Wise referred to House as “the unofficial Secretary of State”. That was House in a nutshell.

House was friends with a British Secret Service officer by the name of Sir William Wiseman, who was head of the BSS in America. On page 142 of A Century of War, Denson quotes that House “habitually permitted Sir William Wiseman…to sit in his private office in New York and read the most secret documents of the American government”. Furthermore, in Griffin’s The Creature From Jekyll Island, Griffin reports that: “House advised Wiseman that President Wilson desired to have Trotsky released, Wiseman advised his government, and the British Admiralty issued orders on April 21st that Trotsky was to be sent on his way”. Thus, House played a key role in enabling Leon Trotsky (birth name Bronstein) to help launch the Bolshevik revolution in Russia.

House helped destroy this great country, being deeply involved in the creation of the Federal Reserve, enabling, Bolshevism, and getting the U.S. into WWI.

~Remember the Founders and the 14 Words~

Elections Reality -and the Way Out

 

 

Elections in the present day U.S.A. are a fantasy. Between the two party system, public funding of campaigns at some levels, Political Advocacy Corporation (PAC) funding, politicians who break campaign promises, the lying mainstream media, and electronic voting machines -we no longer have real or honest elections.

The current political party system we have is not true freedom of choice. First and most obviously, the Democratic and Republican parties are government chartered corporations, as are the other smaller parties. They were granted legal status by the government and exist at the pleasure of the government-just like an incorporated church. Nothing extreme or drastically different than the status quo ever has or ever will ever be embraced by the leadership and platform of the government chartered parties in America. Let us face reality.

We must bear in mind that at first there were no political parties in the U.S.A. While there have always been people who held similar ideological views (such as federalist and anti-federalist), these appear to have not initially been officially organized and governmentally chartered corporations during the early days of the American republic.

While George Washington was considered a federalist ideologically, he was not a member of any political party. Yes my readers, the first man elected to the office of President of the United States had no political party affiliation!

The U.S. Constitution does not mention political parties or make provisions for elections based upon two parties. The elections were to be free to all. The government chartered party system in America has been refined (aka degenerated) into a two party system for practical purposes.

By having two parties, it was supposed to give people a choice; but this has not worked out. By having two parties that agree on core issues and (basically) cooperate when in power, the dissenting patriot is locked out of the political process and there is never any substantial change. While this was probably not the way the early Americans parties (Federalist versus the Democratic-Republican) intended it, this is what it has degenerated to (probably by the design of purposeful subversives).

When you have two parties chartered by the government, who agree on most core issues, are placed on the ballot if they register a candidate, and have themselves and their debates covered on mainstream television channels (which are business corporations operating with a government issued broadcasters license on a protected monopoly/ channel of the electromagnetic spectrum) -then you have a controlled political process.

Even if one desires to play the corporate political party game, it is very difficult to get a third party candidate elected to federal office, or any high state office. The last time there has been someone in the White House that was neither a Republican nor a Democrat was 1853!

Also let us consider electronic voting machines. Perhaps a better name for electronic voting machines would be “sophisticated electronic election theft device”. When there is no paper evidence of a vote, that vote can be counted as a vote for anyone, or note a vote at all.

The machines depend upon accurate software designed by moral men. There are no technological issues that I am aware of that would stop a skilled programmer from setting up the machine to count a vote for the other candidate, as two votes, or not at all. All this fraud is assuming that the machines are not hacked into by an outside source (perhaps working for one of the candidates). Firms such as Diebold are making money off of our (rigged) elections.

Elections in America are no longer transparent and independently verifiable as they were with physical paper ballots. Electronic voting machines are a fraud.

Furthermore, a politician is bound to support the U.S. Constitution, which he swears to uphold when he takes his oath of office. A politician is the representative of the people of his district, but he is bound by the Constitution in what legislation he can introduce or vote for. This is why our government is a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

A politician who votes for a piece of legislation that is in violation of the U.S. Constitution has violated his oath of office and should be removed from office. A vote for unconstitutional legislation is a betrayal of the U.S. Constitution and the American Revolution.

If a politician desires legislation that violates the U.S. Constitution (and/or the U.S. Constitution and the constitution of his state for state officials) then he may propose a constitutional amendment to legally alter the framework within he must work. I suppose that everyone currently in Washington, D.C. has violated the U.S. Constitution by voting for unconstitutional laws.

The above paragraph is probably incomprehensible to the average dumbed down, public school educated, TV watching American on the street today, but it is simple law and logic. Even some readers of this essay (who have not studied the Constitution) may be surprised by the implications of the above statement. Basically everything the federal government does today is unconstitutional.

The whole false model of the left/liberal/Democrat paradigm versus the right/conservative/Republican paradigm is nothing but a fraud to deceive the American people into believing: (1) that these corrupted, nebulous terms have clear and unchanging meaning and (2) that there is a substantial core ideological difference between the present day Democrat and Republican parties.

Neither of the two parties truly stand up for the Bill of Rights. Neither are trying to repeal all unconstitutional laws. Neither are officially opposing the Federal Reserve’s existence and fiat/paper money, UN membership, all wars of foreign intervention, or all socialism programs. Over four decades and several Republican presidents later, and we still have Roe v Wade.

Governments cannot run massive welfare programs and long term wars on true money/specie forever. Debt and empire are inseparable. The expenditures of our out of control government have made American taxpayers slaves to the Federal debt, or rather to the Federal government’s creditors.

Both parties, Republican and Democrat, endorse this whole national debt, paper money, massive military, welfare state scam. Both parties have betrayed the American people. Working within this two party system will get us nowhere.

America is fading away. Our rights are infringed, our money is a fraud, our corporate food production is making us sick and poising our lands, and our economy is nearing hyper-inflation and collapse. America is sick, perhaps unto death.

But there is a way out. The way out is to remove oneself from the system before it collapses or becomes openly tyrannical. To become as self-sufficient as possible, relying as little as possible on mammon, stores, petroleum fuels, the medical establishment, and the state as possible. This goes beyond what is often termed “prepping”. As a Christian, I think this lifestyle also has spiritual benefits.

A few days ago Michael Bunker, an author of many books and advocate for an agrarian separatism, put an excellent article on his website michaelbunker.com. The article is entitled Are You a “Prepper” What Kind? It is great, and helps people like me to refocus on our eventual goals. Check it out, and see where you fall on his scale of preparedness.

( www.michaelbunker.com/are-you-a-prepper-what-kind/ )

 

~Remember the Founders and the 14 Words~

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Ron Paul and the Revolution That Wasn’t

Like a lot of patriots, I used to admire Ron Paul. Over the last decade I purchased and read four books authored or coauthored by him. I used to receive his monthly newsletter from the foundation for Rational Education and Economics, Inc. But I have not followed him much for the last two years.

This brief essay is about Ron Paul, and his “revolution” campaign, sometimes referred to as the “Ron Paul Revolution”. It was a big deal back in 2008, when he published his book The Revolution A Manifesto. It was published by Grand Central Publishing of New York, not a small town or indie publishing house.

For those not in the know, Ron Paul is an 81 year old medical doctor and former U.S. Congressman from Texas. He has been a member of both the Republican and the Libertarian parties. He has ran for president three times, once as a Libertarian and twice as a Republican. I even supported him in his 2008 run.

His “revolution” was a revolution of students, ideas, and votes -not arms. He believed that if we just talked about liberty, the Constitution, free market economics, the fraud of paper money and the Federal Reserve, the 4th Amendment trashing Patriot Act, and a non-interventionist foreign policy -then young people would be converted and we might be able to peacefully restore America.

According to an online October 2011 Christianity Today Q&A type interview by Sarah Pulliam Bailey of, Ron Paul was raised and confirmed Lutheran, raised his children Episcopalian, and now attends a Baptist church. Paul has also closely associated with Roman Catholics like Lew Rockwell, and admires Christ rejecting ethnic Jews such as Rothbard and von Mises. What is Ron Paul spiritually? In all reality, probably nothing.

His book The Revolution is separated into seven sections, and does have some decent information. These sections are devoted to a variety of topics. As you may have guessed, citizen militias and white identity are not given sections!

One example of his partial patriot stance is with one of his key issues, the banks. In the end reading list of The Revolution in 2008, he recommended people read Griffin’s book The Creature From Jekyll Island; but in his 2009 book End The Fed it is not included in the suggested reading section. Could he have backed off because Griffin –in a very brief and non-negative passing way- commented that Rothschild and many of his key lieutenants were Jewish?

In End The Fed, in the 20 page chapter The Origin And Nature of the Fed, he does not mention Rothschild or use the word “Jew”. But he positively mentioned Murray Rothbard, and referred to ethnically Jewish Fed Reserve creation conspirator Paul Warburg as a “German emigre”. Seriously. 

My 2009 first edition hardback copy of End The Fed mentions his wife Carol and six other people: five Austrian economists- Ludwig von Mises, Murray N. Rothbard, F.A. Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Hans F. Sennholz- and his publisher Ben Greenberg. The first two economists (von Mises and Rothbard) were Jews and his publisher (Greenberg) bears an obviously Jewish last name. On top of this, the back dust cover of this work has an endorsement from singer Arlo Guthrie, who is half Jewish. At least four of the seven men he thanked or was endorsed by are either a Jew or a half Jew. That is approximately 57%, in a country that is around 2% Jewish! I think we have found Ron Paul’s leash.

Ron Paul is totally establishment, just a different flavor than most. From college to the Air Force to a government licensed profession (doctor) to Congressman to liberty corporations –Ron Paul has spent his life with the state and the corporations it chartered.

Perhaps the main problem with Ron Paul’s “Revolution” was that it wasn’t.

~Remember the Founders and the 14 Words~

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.