What was that Eric Holder said?

Um, lemme see ... "in things racial we have always been ... essentially a nation of cowards."

Maybe he's right. Lord knows, Helen Thomas looks like she eats small children for breakfast, but I'd feel pretty comfortable calling her a coward. Along with a few other choice words.

From Michelle Malkin:

Helen Thomas has been gabbing with a film crew this morning, according to Washington Times White House correspondent Christina Bellantoni.

“Bobby Jindal was ‘pitiful,’ Helen Thomas tells film crew, right before making a ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ crack.”

Let the media outcry begin!!

(crickets)

Just a quick note to Mr. Obama:

Please stop talking, 'mkay? My portfolio can't take it anymore.

Oh good, cuz I always wanted to live in VENEZUELA!

President for Life - It's Good to be King

Don't think we are being set up for a lifetime of Socialist rule in this country? You'd better brace yourself.

Look what has recently been proposed...

H.J.RES.5

Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Sponsor: Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] (introduced 1/6/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/9/2009 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.

Here is how it reads:


HJ 5 IH

111th CONGRESS
1st Session

H. J. RES. 5

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 6, 2009

Mr. SERRANO introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

`Article--
`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.'.


Don't think this will go anywhere? Some say it's just another Congressman seeking attention (Just like Charlie Rangel's proposal to bring back the military draft) and that the possibility that this goes anywhere is very slim. They say that Rep. Serrano is just some "fringe" Democrat gone wild.

Are you willing to wait and see?

Was this also part of the Democrat party Hope and Change????

Barack Obama has brought no real change to Washington, except that he is moving us much closer to being a Democratic Socialist country.

His administration is seeking to nationalize the banking system.

His Robin Hood administration is seeking to tax the rich to redistribute to "the poor" while bringing amnesty to illegal aliens in this country... and much more.

So do we Americans want to be faced with no term limit on this Presidency?

This legislation is moving forward.

• Introduced on Jan 06, 2009


• Jan 06, 2009: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary


• Feb 09, 2009: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties

We should keep in mind that the Democrats have solid control of both the House and the Senate. Anything is possible.

After all, as Mr. Obama said "He won".

Mr. President, are you listening?

From Michelle Malkin:

“This is our house now:” ACORN mob begins breaking into homes

On Wednesday, I said prepare for lawlessness as ACORN’s civil disobedience mob steps up pressure for President Obama’s mortgage entitlement expansion.

Well, are you ready, Baltimore? (Hat tip - Jeff Quinton) ACORN’s troops are breaking the padlocks and breaking into homes. And this is just the start. Caution: OBAMACORN at work.

A community organization breaks into a foreclosed home in what they are calling an act of civil disobedience.

The group wants to train homeowners facing eviction on peaceful ways they can remain in their homes.

Derek Valcourt reports their actions are not without controversy.

Near Patterson Park, the padlock on the door and the sign in the window tells part of Donna Hanks foreclosure story.

“The mortgage went up $300 in one month,” said Hanks, former homeowner.

She says the bank refused to modify her loan and foreclosed, kicking her out of the house in September.

The community group ACORN calls Hanks a victim of predatory lending.

“This is our house now,” said Louis Beverly, ACORN.

And on Thursday afternoon, they literally broke the foreclosure padlock right off the front door and then broke into the house, letting Hanks back in for the first time in months.

Taxpayer-subsidized anarchy is on the way.

Mr. President? Mr. President?

Good Grief! Is there anyone clean in Obama's administration?

I know, I know. Rhetorical question.

RAHM'S 'RENT' IS JUST THE TIP OF ETHICS ICEBERG Dick Morris, NY Post


NEWS broke last week that Rahm Emanuel, now White House chief of staff, lived rent- free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate. But this is only the tip of Emanuel's previously undislosed ethics problems.

One issue is the work Emanuel tossed the way of De Lauro's husband. But the bigger one goes back to Emanuel's days on the board of now-bankrupt mortgage giant Freddie Mac.

Emanuel is a multimillionaire, but lived for the last five years for free in the tony Capitol Hill townhouse owned by De Lauro and her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg.

During that time, he also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts. It paid Greenberg's firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008. (Emanuel's own campaign committee has also paid Greenberg more than $50,000 since 2004.)

To be fair, Greenberg had polling contracts with the DCCC before - but each new election cycle brings its own set of consultants. And Emanuel was certainly generous with his roommate.

Emanuel never declared the substantial gift of free rent on any of his financial-disclosure forms. He and De Lauro claim that it was just allowable "hospitality" between colleagues. Hospitality - for five years?

Some experts suggest that it was also taxable income: Over five years, the free rent could easily add up to more than $100,000.

Nor is this all that seems to have been missed in the Obama team's vetting process. Consider: Emanuel served on the Freddie Mac board of directors during the time that the government-backed lender lied about its earnings, a leading contributor to the current economic meltdown.

The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency later singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for "failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention." In other words, board members ignored the red flags waving in their faces.

Dare We Say "Accountability" and "Responsibility"?

From the Right Side of Life:

“Attorney Issues a National Grand Jury Declaration”

“As reported late last night via DecaLogosIntl.org, Stephen Pidgeon, attorney for Broe v. Reed, has officially announced that he has issued a declaration (audio at link) for a national grand jury:

Pursuant to First Amendment (The right of the people peaceably to assemble), the Ninth Amendment (The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people), and the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America (The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people), this National Grand Jury is convened by natural born citizens of the fifty several states and of the United States of America, seating 50 jurors pursuant to the duties, powers, responsibilities, qualifications as established hereunder for the following purposes:



• To examine all aspects of the federal government by initiating its own investigations.




• To serve as ombudsmen for the citizens of the country in respect to constitutional rights and privileges established under the organic documents of the United States of America, as properly amended from time to time.




• To conduct criminal investigations of members of the federal government, and, if the evidence is sufficient, issue criminal indictments.



The National Grand Jury Process

The National Grand Jury, although a part of the judicial system, is an entirely independent body. Judges of the Supreme Court, the Courts of Appeal, and the District Courts of the United States, United States Attorneys, and Congress of the United States may act only as advisors. They cannot prevent National Grand Jury action unless that action violates the duly enacted laws as originally created in the United States.

The National Grand Jury shall review and evaluate procedures, methods and systems used by federal governmental agencies to determine whether they comply with the stated objectives of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the United States of America as properly amended.

The National Grand Jury shall review the officers of the federal government to determine whether they are constitutionally qualified to hold office, and to determine if their actions and behavior are consistent with stated objectives of the Declaration of Independence, Constitution for the United States of America as properly amended, and the criminal law as recognized in any of the several states.

No individual grand juror, acting alone, has any power or authority. Meetings of the National Grand Jury are not open to the public. All matters discussed before the National Grand Jury and votes taken are to be kept private and confidential. The end result of inquiries into civil matters are released to the public in the form of a final report which is approved, prior to release, by the Foreperson of the National Grand Jury.

The National Grand Jury is empowered to:



• Inquire into the condition and management of branches of the federal government and its agencies.




• Investigate and report on the operations, accounts and records of federal officers, departments, and functions.




• Inquire into the willful or corrupt misconduct in office of public officers.




• Submit a final report of its findings and recommendations, no later than the end of its term, to the Presiding Juror of the National Grand Jury. “

Read more here:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=3758

State Sovereignty: Saber Rattling or Something More?

From Infowars.com:

Back in December, the Wall Street Journal had a good chuckle over Russian academic Igor Panarin’s prediction that the United States would break apart by 2010. Using threadbare Cold War logic, Andrew Osborn wrote that Panarin’s forecast “is music to the ears of the Kremlin, which in recent years has blamed Washington for everything from instability in the Middle East to the global financial crisis.” For the WSL scribe, Panarin’s analysis is about the Red Bear “returning to its rightful place on the world stage after the weakness of the 1990s, when many feared that the country would go economically and politically bankrupt and break into separate territories.”

In fact, it was not so much “weakness” that destroyed Russia as it was the IMF, the World Bank, and Wall Street, in other words it was another bankster looting and fire sale scheme that brought the former Soviet Union down, not that we should expect the Wall Street Journal to admit as much. Ditto the current “global financial crisis” and instability in the Middle East.

“Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar,” Osborn summarizes. “Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces — with Alaska reverting to Russian control.”

In the case of a growing number of U.S. states, however, it is not so much economic decline and moral degradation pointing the way to a “disintegration,” but rather violations of the Tenth Amendment. The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791, and states restates the Constitution’s principle of Federalism by providing that powers not granted to the national government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states and to the people. It is based on an earlier provision of the Articles of Confederation: “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were nullified many years ago, at least since the emergence of the Federalists under Alexander Hamilton.

Although Fox News and CNN are not telling you about it, a growing number of states are declaring sovereignty. Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, California, and Georgia have all introduced bills and resolutions declaring sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment. Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Nevada, Maine, and Illinois are considering such measures.

For details on the particular bills and resolutions introduced by the above states, check out the following:

Washington

New Hampshire

Arizona

Montana

Michigan

Missouri

Oklahoma

California

Georgia

Sadly, far too many Americans are woefully ignorant when it comes to understanding their rights and the Constitution. As Gary Alder notes in his “15 Key Principles of the Founding Fathers,” the “9th and 10th Amendments are the keystones to preserving Freedom.” In fact, the first 10 amendments, known as the Bill of (Individual) Rights, clarify the restraints placed on the national government and they safeguard the rights of individuals. It does not take a rocket scientist to conclude that all of these individual rights are under withereing attack by the federal government.

“Obama’s plans for a federal handgun license, ‘hate crimes’ laws to regulate Christians’ speech about their own religious beliefs on homosexuality, President Obama’s youth corps for mandatory public service and the so-called ‘Fairness Doctrine’ to ‘balance’ talk radio have New Hampshire Lawmakers telling Obama to basically grow up and get some better ideas,” writes Jake Jones. “They say that if Obama’s plans are implimented, it would constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States.”

Unfortunately, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were nullified many years ago, at least since the emergence of the Federalists under Alexander Hamilton, as Thomas J. DiLorenzo persausively argues. “Federalists like Joseph Story and John Marshall, and later Whig politicians like Daniel Webster and Abraham Lincoln… would tell The Big Lie that the Constitution was ratified by ‘the whole people’ and not as it actually was – by the citizens of the sovereign states, with their representatives assembled in state conventions,” writes DiLorenzo. In the years since, the reach and severity of federalism has grown expotentially. “The U.S. government is now characterized by dictatorial power, abuse of every kind of personal liberty, confiscatory taxation, economic fascism, dangerous militarism, and imperialism.” New World Order minion Obama will take this dictatorial power to new heights under the pretense of saving the people from the bankster engineered global economic depression.

As Obama and Congress further extend the dictatorial reach of the federal government — under the control of a small cotorie of globalists and international bankers — we can expect more states to assert their rights under the Constitution and the Tenth Amendment.

I Want a Divorce

Making the email rounds today ....


Subject: Letter From A Lawyer


Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, Obama supporters, et al:

We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile, slate it up to irreconcilable differences, and go on our own ways.

Here is a model dissolution agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement.

After that it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes. We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.

Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O'Donnell. We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies, and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's, and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .

You can make nice with Iran , Palestine , and France and we'll retain the right t o invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protestors. When our allies or way of life are under assault, we'll provide them job security.

We'll keep our Judeo-Christian Values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, and Shirley McClain. You can have the U.N. But we will no longer be paying the bill. We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.

You can give everyone healthcare, if you can find any practicing doctors (that is practicing, Howard Dean) who will follow to your turf (sic). We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right.

We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and The National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World.

We'll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty its best shot.

Since it often so offends you we'll keep our History, our Name, and our Flag.


Would you agree to this? If so please pass it along to other likeminded patriots and if you do not agree just hit delete and hang on.

In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you ANWAR on who will need whose help in 15 years.

Sincerely,

John J. Wall

Law Student and an American



P.S. Please take Barbra Streisand too.

But the world luuuuuvs us now ... right?

From the UK's Telegraph:

Barack Obama is a novice - and it shows

Barack Obama rides out to rekindle the magic Photo: AP

During last year's epic election campaign, Hillary Clinton said that in the White House "there is no time for on-the-job training". Joe Biden, too, remarked that the presidency was "not something that lends itself to on-the-job training". Both were aiming barbs at their then primary opponent. Mrs Clinton has since brought what she would refer to as her "lifetime of experience" to the role of Secretary of State, while Mr Biden has traded 36 years in the Senate for the vice-presidency. And the rookie they derided is President.

Now, the words of his former rivals are returning to haunt President Obama. After a distinctly rocky start to his presidency, he has admitted he "screwed up" and is returning to one thing in his political career that he has perfected – campaigning. In Elkhart, Indiana, today and Fort Myers, Florida, tomorrow, Mr Obama will try to seize back control of the political agenda with question-and-answer sessions with voters in two of the swing states that gave him victory.

Read more.

A Firearms Refresher Course

‘Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.’ ~ Thomas Jefferson



FIREARMS REFRESHER COURSE

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.

3. Colt: The original point and click interface.

4. Gun control is not about guns; it’s about control.

5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?

6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.

7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.

8. If you don’t know your rights, you don’t have any.

9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.

10. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights Reserved.

11. What part of ’shall not be infringed’ do you not understand?

12. The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.

13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

14. Guns only have two enemies; rust and politicians.

15. Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety.

16. You don’t shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.

17. 911: Government sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.

18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.

19. Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer.

20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.

21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.

22. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for.

23. Enforce the gun control laws we ALREADY have; don’t make more.

24. When you remove the people’s right to bear arms, you create slaves.

25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

South Florida Murder and Barack Obama: The Connection

From America's Right:

Recent case screams for enforcement of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, legislation staunchly opposed by president

MIAMI (AP) -- Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion
clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to
terminate her 23-week pregnancy.

Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure. Only Renelique didn't arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.

What Williams and the Health Department say happened next has shocked people on both sides of the abortion debate: One of the clinic's owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant's umbilical cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.

Police recovered the decomposing remains in a cardboard box a week later
after getting anonymous tips.

Associated Press, February 5, 2009

A living infant, snatched up while struggling for breath, stuffed into a biohazard bag and thrown into a trash can, all at breakneck speed in front of an unwilling young mother shocked to see the life she gave. I’m not sure that’s something anybody wants to see, regardless of affiliation in terms of politics or faith.

For a long time, when it comes to the abortion debate, I was on the opposite side than I am now. It wasn’t my body, after all, and I didn’t want the government to be involved. That changed, of course, when I saw the rest of the babies, so tiny yet so alert, in the neo-natal intensive care unit after my own daughter was born at 34 weeks (she actually threatened to come out three weeks before that) weighing less than five pounds. Even in my ignorance to matters of life prior to that point of epiphany, even when I had a laissez faire attitude toward abortion, I would consider this south Florida incident a case of murder.

The autopsy showed that the baby was struggling for life, that her developing lungs were partially filled with air. Furthermore, recent history has shown that babies born as early as 21 weeks have eventually gone home healthy; one such infant who weighed only ten ounces at birth, Amillia Taylor (pictured above after being born at 21 weeks), just turned a healthy two years old in October. That being said, in the case of this Florida woman and her 23-week-old baby, this was infanticide, plain and simple -- and I’m not sure that most everyday people passed on the street, regardless of their predetermined feelings toward abortion, would necessarily disagree.

What a lot of those everyday people may not know, however, is that they freely elected a president who would unequivocally support the murderous actions of the abortion clinic owner.

This is the very situation which lawmakers sought to prevent with the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, legislation which requires that infants born alive after botched abortions receive life-saving medical attention, legislation which arose in part from an account by an Illinois nurse, Jill Stanek, who reported that such infants born alive were simply cast aside and allowed to die in storerooms and storage closets. When a version of the bill reached the Illinois State Legislature, then State Sen. Barack Obama vehemently argued against it, saying that providing medical care for infants born alive following a botched abortion would place an undue burden on the mother who had already made a decision as to the fate of her baby.

During the debate in the Illinois State Senate, Obama was politically handcuffed and could not refer to a baby born alive following a botched abortion as an actual person, as it was not politically correct to do so -- after all, the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution will not allow someone to kill a child. Instead, in an "it all depends upon what the definition of 'is' is" type of moment, Obama was forced to coin a phrase in order to, at all costs, avoid acknowledging life. He used the term "Pre-Viable Fetus."

Shanice Denise Osbourne, a pre-viable fetus if President Obama ever saw one, was born alive and subsequently killed on the morning of July 20, 2006 in that south Florida abortion clinic. The account of her extremely brief life, as well as the autopsy findings which followed after her decomposing body was later found in a cardboard box in a closet at the clinic, has been enough to bring the abortion debate to the forefront again, yet nobody seems to make the connection between this case, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, and President Barack Obama.

Whenever I see a car with a crucifix dangling from the rear-view mirror and an "Obama-Biden" bumper sticker on the back, I cannot help but shake my head. Most people, because of the mainstream media's favorable stance toward our new president, were not aware before the November election that Obama was willing to deny living infants, survivors of botched abortion procedures, even the most basic medical care for political reasons, that he saw no problem with these children being left to die in a back room or storage closet.

Even now, as many stand horrified--and rightly so--at this story coming out of south Florida, I’m not sure that the connection will be made.

- + - + - + - + - + - + -

From Lizzi:

The silver sliver of a lining to this story is that I would bet that eighteen year old mother is now awake to the truth of abortion, and no longer a supporter.

Funny how our news stories are obsessed with a young woman who brought eight (on top of six) children into this world with albeit questionable intentions and possibly limited sanity, but when it comes to these "doctors" and policies murdering these very same lives, we hear nothing. The fertility doctors' ethics and procedures are being poked and prodded, and sure to eventually be investigated, but these centers of death are allowed to continue? Nobody wants to hear about what abortion really entails, I get that. You can be sure that I wish I had never seen the images or learned what I did when I wrote this post (warning graphic image), but you know what? I don't want to hear stories about child abuse or the gruesome details of what happened to little Kaylee Anthony, but our media won't let me get away from it. We should be rightfully horrified. The same should be said for abortion. If it's harmless and our civil right then put it out there for people to see. But no, we hide it in dark corners, shadowed by the unknown. You and I both know if the media reported on stories like this one, and the horrors of what goes on in abortion clinics, there would less of them. Sick and twisted.

Will Obama's Stimulus Plan Work? Look to Cleveland, Ohio for the Answer.

(H/T HillBuzz)

In the late 80s and early 90s, the City of Cleveland pushed large-scale public development projects that were supposed to stimulate the city’s economy and bring prosperity to all, ending years of decline in which Cleveland dropped in both population and national stature (once the 8th largest city in the US in the 1900s, Cleveland’s now the 40th largest in 2009, and still shrinking).

To stimulate the local economy, city leaders embraced the Rock n’ Roll Hall of Fame, Jacobs Field, Gund Arena (now Quicken Loans Center), a new Cleveland Browns Stadium, and commercial projects such as Tower City Center and the Galleria downtown shopping malls, thinking investing large amounts of money in construction mega-projects would turn the city around.

It didn’t.

Cleveland marketed these construction projects as a renaissance, calling itself “The Comeback City”, but no matter what Clevelanders built, or how much money they spent on fancy new projects, population continued to drop precipitously and businesses left the downtown business district in droves.

Few new jobs were created by any of these enormous projects, despite years-long promises from the Mayors of Cleveland for exactly that all throughout the Byzantine planning and development process for all of them. Aside from the temporary employment generated by the actual construction projects themselves and the people employed in each of the buildings to keep them running, no jobs were created by any of these “stimuli”.

The Rock n’ Roll Hall of Fame, Great Lakes Science Center, and new Cleveland Browns Stadium were supposed to anchor a revitalized Cleveland Lakefront that would attract scores of new commercial and residential developments — which never came.

Jacob’s Field and Gund Arena were supposed to jumpstart commerical and residential development in their surrounding areas as well, but that didn’t happen either.

With each of these massive projects, there was a momentary increase in restaurants, souvenir shops, and some hotel development as people wanted to take advantage of the excitement generated by these new city attractions.

But nothing was planned well.

Restaurants that opened near Jacob’s Field and Gund Arena failed to consider what would drive their business during the months of the year without baseball and basketball games. Since the city didn’t incorporate permanent mixed-income residential development into the construction projects, not enough people ever lived downtown to support year-round successful restaurants, boutiques, shops, or other commercial walk-ups that would have truly revitalized the city core. No one made enough money during baseball or basketball season to keep businesses afloat during the bitterly cold lean months.

The catch-22 was that only high-end condos were explored for residential use around these expensive attractions, but those projects faltered because the sidewalks rolled up each night at 6pm, since not enough people lived downtown to make the neighborhood lively, but the neighborhood never became lively because it never acquired a good mix of residents to keep those businesses afloat, and people wealthy enough to afford the pricey condos didn’t want to live in a ghost town (but they didn’t want to live next to middle class or poor people either, in a mixed-income neighborhood that would thrive, but would never exist with only marquee developments).

And Cleveland kept repeating these same mistakes for 20 years, building one hulking mega-attraction after another, sinking millions upon millions into this stimulus strategy, but never getting the stimulus results it wanted because the focus was always in the wrong place and nothing ever worked out the way the city leaders intended.

No expense was ever spared on these projects either.

The finest polished marbles from France and Italy. Gorgeous chandeliers and eclectic modern art. Enormous shopping centers like Tower City Center, which opened in 1990 with the likes of Gucci, Calvin Klein, and Fendi, but saw its fortunes drop a few years later to host only Banana Republic, The Gap, and Waldenbooks, while today it’s down to The Dollar Store, Check Cashing shops, and discounted baby clothes. The ambitions were enormous for stimulus projects like Tower City, but eighteen years after their launch, there’s little to show for all of that expense, and the bargain shoppers who now haunt those marbled halls are certainly not the high-income types the city dreamed would launch Cleveland’s sustained urban renaissance.

And that Dollar Store where Calvin Klein once sat in downtown Cleveland’s what I keep coming back to when I think of the Obama Trillion Dollar Stimulus Plan.

Because it’s the same thing I've seen in Cleveland time and again, for all of those years, never bearing the results that were promised, despite the millions upon million sunk into construction and development initiatives.

No new jobs.

No renaissance.

No revitalized urban core.

No future for Clevelanders.

Nothing to show for all that investment, except exceedingly wealthy construction companies,

We’re now poised to make those same mistakes on a national scale, with greater expense and much more at stake.

Wherever you live, you probably have examples of this sort of thing of your own. Based on that, what do you think will happen to that trillion in stimulus spending? Because spending is always local, even if the money’s coming from national coffers. Mega-construction projects in Cleveland that didn’t turn the city around in the 80s and 90s are not going to turn the nation around in 2009. Whatever didn’t work in your home town when local money was sunk into it is not going to work now that Obama’s diverting our tax dollars into it.

It’s shocking that no one seems to appreciate this, and that we’re all set to embark on a course of disappointments those of us with Cleveland ties know very well from so many years of experience.