Saturday, December 6, 2008

An Open Letter To The Officers Of The United States Military Forces

An Open Letter To The Officers Of The United States Military Forces


In the course of recent history there have occurred numerous events which give rise to our urgent concern as to where your immediate loyalty lies. Is it with the People of the several United States of America, or is it to the would-be Commander in Chief, the president elect and to the Supreme Court of the United States?

Because of numerous apparently erroneous decisions made by the Supreme Court in the near past, decisions that were more political than constitutional, there is a well-seated concern regarding their decision on a very serious allegation before them today. The concern is that the president-elect in the person of Barak Hussein Obama is not qualified to fill the office of President of the United States and that of Commander-In-Chief of the military forces of this great nation because of constitutional restrictions for the candidate to that high office. It is a question of his status as a natural born citizen of these United States.

If the Supreme Court makes the correct decision according to the Constitution of the United States and finds that Mr. Obama is not qualified to that office there will have to be another selection to fill the office and give to you and your fellow officers a proper, Constitutional Commander-in-Chief.

If, however, as anticipated, the Supreme Court errs to political pressure and allows the faulted election of Barak Hussein Obama to stand, then you will have to make the personal, serious decision to act under your oath-of-office as a commissioned officer of the United States of America. You cannot lawfully serve under an unconstitutional president. Any orders issued as Commander-in-Chief will be unlawful orders.

History is replete with examples of the people's worst enemy being their own government taken over by power hungry despots. I have no reason to believe that human nature has changed, that given the opportunity, evil men will impose their will upon the populace.

The form of government established by this Nation's founders is one of Law based upon absolute Principles, not upon the whims of individuals nor even of the majority of the people. They wrote a Constitution expressly limiting the authority of the federal government and denying to elected leadership unilateral and unquestioned authority.

You are reminded that your oath upon commissioning as an officer of this nation is to support and defend that Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic and through it, the people of these several States. It is not to obey a Commander in Chief, whether qualified or not. Even less is it to obey the faulted decision of a faulted court.

You are further reminded that it is well established in international law that following the orders of a superior authority is in no defense in your personal responsibility for unlawful acts by you as commissioned military leaders.

It is with these points in mind that I demand that you make a personal decision and public commitment that, if and when you are ordered to accept a blatantly unconstitutional decision that grossly damages our constitutional underpinnings, action against the people of these several States or the Constitution established by them, you stand with the people and their Constitution to protect them from intrusion upon rights, their persons and their property and to defend them against all actions, either violent or non-violent, perpetrated by those enemies, domestic or foreign, whose object is the destruction of the Constitution.

I call upon you to renounce any action in violation of the people or their Constitution, and to bring to bear all the forces under your command to the protection and defense of these high purposes. In the Name of the Almighty God, I fully expect you to fulfill to the maximum your obligations set forth in your oath of office - I will accept nothing less.

Bob Worn, Major - USAF (Retired)

1811 Shamburger Road

Gilmer, Texas 75645-2810

Our prayer For Today…

Our Dear and Most Gracious Heavenly Father, please be with us in our hour of need. Guide us in seeing the correct way to go, the wisdom to see our correct path according to our oath of office as sworn to you. Please give us the courage to do that which must be done and the leadership, in Your Name, to have others follow us in our task. All this we pray in Thy Holy Name and In The Name of Your Son Jesus. Amen

As a post script…

A Necessary Review Of Our Oath Of Office…

As you will remember, we all took an oath that ended "… So Help Me God."

Let's rely on Him now when we need His strength.

As you know, we did NOT take an oath to fly airplanes, fight wars, kill innocent humans, obey orders of an unqualified, unconstitutional president or those of congress that collectively turns their backs on their sworn oath.

We took one oath and one oath only - to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against ALL enemies, foreign or domestic. And then we asked God for His help in fulfilling that oath of office.

Have you ever wondered why, in our oath of office, the authors placed the word domestic when referring to future, real enemies of the constitution? I truly believe that we could be seeing the reason today.

MY OATH OF OFFICE AS SWORN BY ME ON 13 DECEMBER 1957

“I, Robert William Worn, A03081165, having been appointed a Second

Lieutenant, United States Air Force, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to same; that I take this obligation freely, without mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter. So Help Me God.”

The following added by Storm'n Norm'n

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies in the heart of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear. The traitor is the plague…”

- Marcus Tullius Cicero, speech to the Roman Senate.

Get Rich Quick - The loophole for the poor and disenfranchised...just what Obama ordered!

video

"...they would be committing treason to the Constitution" Let's see what unfolds on December 8th.

PRESS RELEASE
Mr. Obama's Eligibility To Be Aired Monday at the National Press Club


Last update: 3:18 p.m. EST Dec. 4, 2008

QUEENSBURY, N.Y., Dec 04, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- On Monday, December 8, 2008, at 1:30 pm, the We The People Foundation will conduct a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington D.C.
The licensed attorneys who initiated lawsuits in PA (Philip Berg), NJ (Leo Donofrio) and CA (Orly Taitz), challenging Mr. Obama's legal eligibility to hold the Office of President of the United States, will briefly summarize the facts, legal arguments and status of their cases. They will answer questions from the press.
Prior to the start of the conference, at 10 am, the Supreme Court of the United States is expected to announce whether it will consider applications from these attorneys who have asked the Court to delay the proceedings of the Electoral College pending a determination of the underlying constitutional question - the meaning of the "natural born citizen" clause of Article II of the Constitution and its application to Mr. Obama.
Robert Schulz will briefly discuss Mr. Obama's response to the publication of his Open Letter in the Chicago Tribune on Monday and Wednesday of this week. For the reasons given in the Open Letter, Schulz asked Mr. Obama to: (1) immediately authorize Hawaiian officials to provide a team of forensic scientists access to his original ("vault") birth certificate and (2) arrange for the delivery of other documents needed to conclusively establish Obama's citizenship status. Mr. Schulz will answer questions from the press.
"Under our Constitution, no one is eligible to assume the Office of the President unless he or she is a 'natural born citizen,'" said Bob Schulz, Chairman of the Foundation. "To date, Mr. Obama has refused all requests to release his original birth certificate or other documents that would definitively establish his citizenship status and thus his constitutional eligibility."
The Open Letter to Mr. Obama summarizes the evidence against Mr. Obama and the adverse consequences that would befall the Nation should he assume the Office of the President as a usurper.
"Should the state members of the Electoral College cast their votes for Mr. Obama in the face of such overwhelming evidence, and without verification of Mr. Obama's eligibility, they would be committing treason to the Constitution," said Schulz.
SOURCE We The People Foundation For Constitutional Education, Inc.
 http://www.WeThePeopleFoundation.org
Copyright (C) 2008 PR Newswire. All rights reserved

Friday, December 5, 2008

Miss Pelosi, How do you spell "HYPOCRISY"?

Click on picture to enlarge.



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's home district includes San Francisco .

Star-Kist Tuna's headquarters are in San Francisco, Pelosi's home district. Star-Kist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a major contributor to Pelosi.


Star-Kist is the major employer in American Samoa employing 75% of the Samoan workforce.


Paul Pelosi, Nancy's husband, owns $17 million dollars of Star-Kist stock. [This is a misnomer... California is a community property state, therefor, Nancy Pelosi is also THE owner. This is the ultimate form of deceit and dishonesty a legislator can perform, and is more than simply a conflict of interest... It's the epitome of...I have no other word...a thief...if I were a cuzz'n man the words would not be suitable for print! ...yeah, she likes taking care of the poor and underprivileged, the poor little rich people like her and her husband!]


In January, 2007 when the minimum wage was increased from $5.15 to $7.25, Pelosi had American Samoa exempted from the increase so Del Monte would not have to pay the higher wage. This would make Del Monte products less expensive than their competition's.


Last week when the huge bailout bill was passed, Pelosi added an earmark to the final bill adding $33 million dollars for an 'economic development credit in American Samoa '.


Pelosi has called the Bush Administration "CORRUPT" ? ?


How do you spell "HYPOCRISY"?


Are you a whiz? Take The Spiegel Quiz

SPIEGEL PUB QUIZ

A Flight of Fecal Festive Fancy

As the festive season hots up, it's time to look at the strange but true goings on of the past few weeks. If you think you know your wild boars from your polar bears and have the thirst for some Christmas tipples, then hop on the SPIEGEL ONLINE tabogan and take the very special Pub Quiz.



Question 1 of 10

Equality is important, even in prison. The German high court recently ruled on a complaint from an aggrieved prisoner who said he should be entitled to a privilege available to women prisoners. What inequality did he think needed to be redressed?

If Elvis Is Not Dead...neither is Hitler

NAZI NO-NO

Vienna Tram Driver Sacked For 'Sieg Heil' Greeting

A tram driver in Vienna who welcomed passengers with the Nazi greeting "Sieg Heil" has been sacked. He said he was only joking, but passengers and the Vienna transport company didn't see the joke.

A Vienna tram driver was sacked on Monday a day after barking "Sieg Heil" down the intercom at passengers. When a number of them protested vehemently against his use of the Nazi greeting, the 35-year-old driver said in a broad Viennese accent: "Can't you take a joke?"

He apologized to them, but was nevertheless sacked without notice by the Vienna transport company which called his behavior "unspeakable." The Vienna state prosecutor's office said it may take legal action against him and was checking whether he broke a law banning "National Socialist re-engagement."

One passenger on board the Number 1 tram, which runs around the inner city, filmed the incident on a mobile phone and put it on Youtube (eds: the video has since been removed but was available for viewing for a number of days after the incident). Newspapers reported that the "Sieg Heil" call triggered boos and hooting from the guests, and that some of the passengers had defended him, saying he had only been joking.


Thursday, December 4, 2008

2nd Amendment Rights...even for the elderly

Aah, excuse me. Should that headline read, “Aimed by Elderly…”

From Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,461928,00.html

Easy-to-Use 'Palm Pistol' Aimed at Elderly, Disabled

Thursday , December 04, 2008

You've heard of the Palm Pilot? Well, here's the Palm Pistol.

Constitution Arms, a small arms manufacturer based in Maplewood, N.J., is taking deposits for what it touts as the world's first ergonomically designed firearm.

Intended for use by the elderly and disabled, the single-shot 9-mm weapon looks like a giant bean grasped in the palm of the hand.

The barrel points out between the user's fingers. You "pull" the trigger by pressing on a thumbed button at the top.

"Point and shoot couldn't be easier," states the blurb on the product's Web site.

Even better, Constitution Arms says it's had it certified by the FDA as a "Class I Medical Device." That means doctors could prescribe the handgun to qualified patients, who would then have some or all of the cost reimbursed by Medicare or private insurance.

The gun will cost about $300. A deposit to get yours when it's ready is $25, though Constitution Arms doesn't say exactly when that will be.


Reserve yours here:http://www.palmpistol.com/form.html

In My Humble Opinion...If we never had Clinton and Carter, Obama would still be a gangster in the south of Chicago.

Public Perception Worked For Communism Too

by JR Dieckmann

During the Soviet Empire, communists employed the tactics of public perception to control the thinking of the Russian people with propaganda distributed through their government-owned media. Many Russian citizens believed life was good under communism, and everything was just dandy in Russia right up to the total collapse of the Russian economy and the downfall of the Soviet Union. Some Russians, fooled by their media, are still wondering what happened to their glorious empire.

The media here in America aren’t owned by the government, but they might as well be owned by the Democrat party when 90% of newspaper and broadcast media are liberal supporters of what ever Bozo the Democrats run for president. With their vast resources, the only information they were willing to distribute on Barack Obama was kept in a small box, and nothing outside of that box was ever discussed in any mainstream media outlet. To see what was in that box CLICK HERE for the brief Obama bio that covers everything the media was willing to tell about the candidate.

You would think that liberal media followers would have become bored with having only their imaginations to rely on for the meanings of “hope” and “change,” while new media followers are still trying to absorb the torrents of information revealed about this spurious president elect. Conservatives are enlightened on an almost daily basis by new revelations about Obama, while liberals are merely gloating over thinking they have elected America’s first black president.

With numerous lawsuits filed from coast to coast by people and organizations demanding to see Obama’s authentic birth certificate (to verify his legitimacy for president), two have finally risen to the U. S. Supreme Court and will be considered for hearing on December 5th. This could very well become the biggest news story of the century, yet there is still no mention of it in the mainstream media. Even if they think the charges are baseless, the lawsuits are very real and warrant some amount of coverage, even by the worthless alphabet media. Don’t be surprised if this whole issue gets swept under the rug by the powers that be in Washington, and the new national seat in Chicago.

By burying the details of Barack Obama’s history and birth, the media attempt to control public perception of the proposed new president in hopes that Americans will never find out the real truth about him and demand that he resign from his political career before he is actually elected by the Electoral College on December 15th.

Congress frequently depends on public perception to mislead the public on important issues. We see this regularly from Nancy Pelosi as she lies and spins every issue to the news cameras with that morbid grin on her face that conceals a face of doom. Democrats remain smug in their confidence that media talking heads will repeat their every word in their mission to influence public perception to keep Democrats in power. As Chris Mathews said: “It’s my job now to make this [Obama} presidency successful.” Ask any liberal politician a direct question on an important issue and you’re likely to get a 5 minute filibuster on what they want the public to think, but it will not include the answer to your question.

I just have to laugh at all this nonsense about Detroit CEOs and their corporate jets. When the Big 3 automaker CEOs came to Washington with their hands out for a taxpayer bailout, the congressional committee seemed more interested in how they got there than in finding solutions to the problem - whether it be a government loan or anything else. These committee jackasses seem to think they are on the Supreme Court. No doubt, during the next (proposed) administration, they will show up for hearings in robes.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) said to the 3 CEOs "I'm going to ask the three executives here to raise their hand if they flew here commercial." No hands went up. Then he said "I'm going ask you to raise your hand if you're planning to sell your jet . . . and fly back commercial." Again no hands went up. He followed with "Let the record show no hands went up."

When the hearing was about $25 billion in government loans, why was Sherman so interested in a few thousand dollars a flight for the CEOs to get there, and to be sure it went on the record? Because he knew the media would cover it, and make a big deal about it, to influence public perception against the Big 3 CEOs and corporate America.

We are simply supposed to believe that all of the financial problems encountered by corporate America today are always the fault of “greedy” CEOs, and never the result of lame brained congressional regulation or union extortion of business management to pad the pockets of union officials and workers. The class warfare that was the centerpiece of the Obama campaign has begun now to flourish in a Democrat Congress. Don’t hold you breath for any Democrat CEOs to be called before the panel to answer tough questions though.

Had it not been for government regulations, created by Democrats and applied to the mortgage industry to ensure toxic home loans were granted, the mortgage meltdown would not have occurred. Had it not been for liberal legislation banning domestic energy production throughout most of the country, a gallon of gasoline would not have become unaffordable to millions of Americans who took advantage of those mortgage regulations. Still, Congress wants us to believe that it was all the fault of “greedy” CEOs, and they depend on the liberal alphabet media to create that public perception. The deception worked most effectively.

What's the big deal over corporate jets? Most all corporate executives and CEOs use corporate jets to get around the country for meetings and seminars. They don't really have the time or the need to travel on commercial aircraft and risk delays. That's what corporate jets are for. The Big 3 automakers are not in financial trouble because of their private jets.

If a private jet is good enough for Nancy Pelosi - who demanded her own upgrade it to a 747, then it should be good enough for the CEOs of Ford, GM, and Chrysler who actually work for a living and create millions of jobs and funnel billions of dollars into the economy. If congressional Democrats want to restrict the use of corporate jets, they had better not plan on any campaign contributions from Learjet, and Gulfstream in the future. Their businesses will be in the tank along with the Big 3.

One of the luxuries of becoming a CEO of a major corporation is that you get certain perks and luxuries, providing your company is making a decent profit. It is the responsibility of the CEO to be sure the company is making a profit, but some things are out of the control of the CEOs. What happened to GM had nothing to do with private jets.

GM used to make a fair profit, but that was before Democrats took control of Congress and the price of gas began to skyrocket. GM lost $38.7 billion in 2007. The socialist UAW became to big and powerful, and began demanding too much of the industry pie, while accepting little of the losses. Meanwhile, Toyota has been cutting deeply into GM auto sales with their lower operating costs.

It’s not that their cars are better than GM, Ford, and Chrysler. It’s that it costs less to build them when they don‘t have to pay excessive UAW extortion expenses. They can therefore sell them for a lower price which the Big 3 then have to compete with at a higher manufacturing cost that leaves no room for profit. On top of that comes the costs of retooling their factories to comply with government-created environmental regulations like CAFE, but Congress fails to fund these regulations so compliance by the automakers puts them deep into debt.

The steep rise in the price of gas that began in 2007 cut deeply into GM’s SUV sales - the main profit maker for the company. GM doesn’t make any profit on the smaller, high mileage cars so the losses started piling up. At the same time, Congressional demands that they invest billions into engineering and design to meet CAFÉ standards haven‘t lessoned the costs.

What’s a CEO to do when you’re bound by government regulations and union extortion with threats of labor strikes if you don‘t pay for workers who aren‘t working anymore? UAW demands add $1300 to the cost of every car GM sells. That means that Toyota and Honda can make the same car for more than $1300 less when you factor in automation.

It’s not as though GM has just been irresponsible with its spending. The company has been going through restructuring to cut costs since 2005, but one time buyout expenditures were necessary and expensive, which put the company into the red. Still, in 2006, GM cut its costs by $6.8 billion, and an additional $2.2 billion in 2007. And they didn’t have to sell a single private jet to do it. Restructuring is still taking place to reduce costs but GM doesn’t expect to realize a profit until 2010. Until then, they still have to pay for retooling and union blackmail.

GM’s goal of staying in business and ever again making a profit will depend heavily on major cuts in excessive UAW benefits and wages. Or as Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson writes: “Maybe, just maybe, a crash course in economic reality would impart the lesson that a worker is better off working 40 hours per week at $40 per hour compensation than zero hours per week at $70 per hour.”

Did the congressional committee consider this when they told the CEOs to go home and come up with a plan to reduce costs? Of course not. Word might leak out that the CEOs are already doing the cost cutting job that Congress is demanding of them. The last thing Congress wants is for the CEOs to actually look like fiscally-responsible leaders of their companies. The public perception that CEOs are to blame for the financial crisis must be maintained, and the failed policies of Congress must never be questioned.

What a scam this whole idea of a bailout is anyway. America didn’t just win a global lottery. Hank Paulson and President Bush decided that we suddenly have $700 billion to hand out (which we don't) and suddenly everyone has their hand out for a piece of the pie. Now Treasury Secretary Paulson, tells us that half of the $700 billion is not going to buy up toxic mortgages, but is being used instead, to buy up stock in banks. The other half of the money ($350 billion) he is saving for the Obama administration to use as they see fit. What the hell is this - "free money" from Mathew Lesko's version of government?

The $700 billion is not a "bailout;" it's a handout by government of money stolen from the taxpayers. Obama, ACORN, Clinton, and the Democrats got us into this economic crisis and blamed it all on Bush and the Republicans to win the election. Unfortunately, McCain/Palin did nothing to combat it and defend Republicans. Now Obama is telling us that Democrats have no exit strategy from this crisis, and the only thing he can suggest is another multi-billion dollar "stimulus" handout. Isn't that Einstein’s definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?

How about if Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid get rid of their private jets to help cut the costs of government to the taxpayers? Where do these congressional hypocrites - who continually show a $3 billion deficit in their own budget - get off judging professional corporate executives who are enslaved to unions and government regulations? When did professional politicians become proficient at running anything other than their mouths, while continuing to ignore the regulations imposed on them by the Constitution?

As much as Congress and the media try to create the public perception that the American auto industry troubles were all caused by greedy CEOs, the truth of the matter is that they are victims of Congress, unions, and economic conditions over which they have no control. Congress talks a lot about “oversight,” but who oversees Congress, where a maximum amount of oversight is obviously needed?

With the recent bailing out of Citibank in addition to other financial institutions, while refusing aid to the Big 3, it is beginning to look like our government is interested only in using American taxpayers’ money to bail out international bankers, but not American iconic industries which have fallen victim to them, to unions, and to congressional regulations.

The public perception of Congress and the corporate sector must be maintained if Democrats are to remain in power. Blame the CEOs. Blame the “rich” and take their money which they invest in America - to “stimulate the economy” by giving it to the poor, who will not invest it in anything but flat screen TVs and video games. But never, ever, point a finger at Congress and their insane legislation that has been the root cause of all of our major economic and social problems for decades.

If politicians insist on taking credit for running the country, then it’s time they take credit for this current crisis that they have created as well. If an unscrupulous media want to do the bidding of dishonest politicians to guarantee their invitations to beltway dinners, then they also need to share the blame for creating a false public perception of Congress and the private sector, and for failing to do the job that their professional code of ethics demands of them.

The growing public perception of the alphabet and print media is that they are not to be trusted in presenting fair, complete, and unbiased information to the public. They have sealed this perception with their performance in covering the recent presidential election campaigns. The decline of confidence in the broadcast and print media is expected to continue in coming years until they become a no longer viable media for news and political information.

As more and more people turn to “new media” internet and talk radio, they become more informed and more aware of the truth concerning important issues, and more aware of the misinformation and lack of information being distributed by the elite liberal media. Public perception of mainstream media is changing rapidly, and that’s a good sign for America’s eventual recovery from the liberal wasteland of ignorance that has prevailed for too long now.










Where now is our last best hope on Earth? from the London Mail

Cross posted from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1084111/PETER-HITCHENS-The-night-waved-goodbye-America--best-hope-Earth.html#



The night we waved goodbye to America... our last best hope on Earth

Last updated at 5:57 PM on 10th November 2008 by Peter Hitchens

Anyone would think we had just elected a hip, skinny and youthful replacement for God, with a plan to modernise Heaven and Hell – or that at the very least John Lennon had come back from the dead.

The swooning frenzy over the choice of Barack Obama as President of the United States must be one of the most absurd waves of self-deception and swirling fantasy ever to sweep through an advanced civilisation. At least Mandela-worship – its nearest equivalent – is focused on a man who actually did something.

I really don’t see how the Obama devotees can ever in future mock the Moonies, the Scientologists or people who claim to have been abducted in flying saucers. This is a cult like the one which grew up around Princess Diana, bereft of reason and hostile to facts.

It already has all the signs of such a thing. The newspapers which recorded Obama’s victory have become valuable relics. You may buy Obama picture books and Obama calendars and if there isn’t yet a children’s picture version of his story, there soon will be.

Proper books, recording his sordid associates, his cowardly voting record, his astonishingly militant commitment to unrestricted abortion and his blundering trip to Africa, are little-read and hard to find.

If you can believe that this undistinguished and conventionally Left-wing machine politician is a sort of secular saviour, then you can believe anything. He plainly doesn’t believe it himself. His cliche-stuffed, PC clunker of an acceptance speech suffered badly from nerves. It was what you would expect from someone who knew he’d promised too much and that from now on the easy bit was over.

He needn’t worry too much. From now on, the rough boys and girls of America’s Democratic Party apparatus, many recycled from Bill Clinton’s stained and crumpled entourage, will crowd round him, to collect the rich spoils of his victory and also tell him what to do, which is what he is used to.

Just look at his sermon by the shores of Lake Michigan. He really did talk about a ‘new dawn’, and a ‘timeless creed’ (which was ‘yes, we can’). He proclaimed that ‘change has come’. He revealed that, despite having edited the Harvard Law Review, he doesn’t know what ‘enormity’ means. He reached depths of oratorical drivel never even plumbed by our own Mr Blair, burbling about putting our hands on the arc of history (or was it the ark of history?) and bending it once more toward the hope of a better day (Don’t try this at home).

I am not making this up. No wonder that awful old hack Jesse Jackson sobbed as he watched. How he must wish he, too, could get away with this sort of stuff.

And it was interesting how the President-elect failed to lift his admiring audience by repeated – but rather hesitant – invocations of the brainless slogan he was forced by his minders to adopt against his will – ‘Yes, we can’. They were supposed to thunder ‘Yes, we can!’ back at him, but they just wouldn’t join in. No wonder. Yes we can what exactly? Go home and keep a close eye on the tax rate, is my advice. He’d have been better off bursting into ‘I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony’ which contains roughly the same message and might have attracted some valuable commercial sponsorship.

Perhaps, being a Chicago crowd, they knew some of the things that 52.5 per cent of America prefers not to know. They know Obama is the obedient servant of one of the most squalid and unshakeable political machines in America. They know that one of his alarmingly close associates, a state-subsidised slum landlord called Tony Rezko, has been convicted on fraud and corruption charges.

They also know the US is just as segregated as it was before Martin Luther King – in schools, streets, neighbourhoods, holidays, even in its TV-watching habits and its choice of fast-food joint. The difference is that it is now done by unspoken agreement rather than by law.

If Mr Obama’s election had threatened any of that, his feel-good white supporters would have scuttled off and voted for John McCain, or practically anyone. But it doesn’t. Mr Obama, thanks mainly to the now-departed grandmother he alternately praised as a saint and denounced as a racial bigot, has the huge advantages of an expensive private education. He did not have to grow up in the badlands of useless schools, shattered families and gangs which are the lot of so many young black men of his generation.

If the nonsensical claims made for this election were true, then every positive discrimination programme aimed at helping black people into jobs they otherwise wouldn’t get should be abandoned forthwith. Nothing of the kind will happen. On the contrary, there will probably be more of them.

And if those who voted for Obama were all proving their anti-racist nobility, that presumably means that those many millions who didn’t vote for him were proving themselves to be hopeless bigots. This is obviously untrue.

I was in Washington DC the night of the election. America’s beautiful capital has a sad secret. It is perhaps the most racially divided city in the world, with 15th Street – which runs due north from the White House – the unofficial frontier between black and white. But, like so much of America, it also now has a new division, and one which is in many ways much more important. I had attended an election-night party in a smart and liberal white area, but was staying the night less than a mile away on the edge of a suburb where Spanish is spoken as much as English, plus a smattering of tongues from such places as Ethiopia, Somalia and Afghanistan.

As I walked, I crossed another of Washington’s secret frontiers. There had been a few white people blowing car horns and shouting, as the result became clear. But among the Mexicans, Salvadorans and the other Third World nationalities, there was something like ecstasy.

They grasped the real significance of this moment. They knew it meant that America had finally switched sides in a global cultural war. Forget the Cold War, or even the Iraq War. The United States, having for the most part a deeply conservative people, had until now just about stood out against many of the mistakes which have ruined so much of the rest of the world.

Suspicious of welfare addiction, feeble justice and high taxes, totally committed to preserving its own national sovereignty, unabashedly Christian in a world part secular and part Muslim, suspicious of the Great Global Warming panic, it was unique.

These strengths had been fading for some time, mainly due to poorly controlled mass immigration and to the march of political correctness. They had also been weakened by the failure of America’s conservative party – the Republicans – to fight on the cultural and moral fronts.

They preferred to posture on the world stage. Scared of confronting Left-wing teachers and sexual revolutionaries at home, they could order soldiers to be brave on their behalf in far-off deserts. And now the US, like Britain before it, has begun the long slow descent into the Third World. How sad. Where now is our last best hope on Earth?