"That Republicans still manage to talk about economic policy at all demonstrates a remarkable amount of chutzpah."

It also demonstrates how bad the "liberal" media are at doing their actual job. The fact that the NYT report was so outstanding and deserved mention is a depressing reminder that this kind of media driven fact-checking is not very common.

you dont need to be an economist and make squiggles to figure out that billions poured into the economy slowed down the disintegration of the economy...after all, it's not like all those billions of dollars just went over to Iraq, or to bank bail-outs.

The only reason the GOP gets away with saying that a spending freeze (or massive tax cuts, for that matter) is the way out of a major down-turn in the business cycle is because far too few Americans study economics at any level of their education. I have always felt that requiring at least a semester of macroeconomic theory in high school and college is as important to schools turning out good citizens as the requirements that exist for English, math or social studies.

If we all had even a little basic economic theory we would recognize that much of what passes for republican wonkiness is simply gibberish.

It appears Republicans always take the easy way out and champion the position that takes no political courage when it comes to domestic issues. It's easy to stand back and say tax cuts all day. It's an easy sell and its what gets them back into office over and over.

Agreed that the charts are instructive, and a third line would show the Republicans in their true colors. But how about a fourth line plotting the effect of the stimulus originally proposed by progressive Democrats and endorsed by Paul Krugman? That would be an even better line-up.

Four lines. Add one that shows what would have happened if we had enacted the larger stimulus that Krugman and others were calling for.

Very on board with idea that Macro should be mandatory. My children's HS, to their credit, require seniors to take a semester of Macro and a semester of Government. Wish they'd make take a year of both but it beats nothing by a long shot.

I'd like to see what noncarborundum asked, the increased stimulus suggested by Krugman.

A fifth line would be interesting. It could forecast what would have happened if we had a Govn't spending freeze. Splash that result all over the news to make America realize just how insane the current Republican mentality is.

Then, do another line that would predict of all the social nets weren't in place, food stamps, unemployment, social security, medicare/medicaid, etc. Plot that line out to show what would happen in a modern day conservative utopia.

The DNC is too stingy in off years. There is no reason we should not be purchasing TV spots to show these charts. It would help put a floor under the typical off-year softness in party-in-power favorability, and pay off both now in a policy sense and in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

from the original (RTWT): In interviews, a broad range of economists said the White House and Congress were right to structure the package as a mix of tax cuts and spending, rather than just tax cuts as Republicans prefer or just spending as many Democrats do. And it is fortuitous, many say, that the money gets doled out over two years — longer for major construction — considering the probable length of the “jobless recovery” under way as wary employers hold off on new hiring.

Yeah, that will save the Democratic party! Some charts!

Lets face it: "things would have been worse!" is never going to sound like anything but an excuse.

How they feel justified complaining now, rather than thanking president for preventing an economic catastrophe, is a point of ongoing concern.

"ongoing concern?" Actually it points very clearly to their motivation.

They don't give a damn about America or Americans. They are after power for themselves. Nothing else. So they will say anything and do anything they think they can get away with or not seem to have their fingers on directly.

The Republican Party demonstrates politics at its worst.

"who sell their forecasts to paying clients."

It's pretty clear that some form of government intervention was necessary to advert a full scale economic decline.

However, who are these companies' clientele? Surely we would be lambasting a company that sold its research to the RNC? Maybe they do list their clientele, I haven't the time to be an investigative journalist, but I seriously doubt it.

"Surely we would be lambasting a company that sold its research to the RNC?"

Why would we be doing that? It makes no sense. As long as they maintain their professionalism and refuse to skew their results based on politics, I don't see why selling results to the RNC would be any more outrageous than to anyone else.

Good, more for the oligarchs to take from you!

In other news, studies show the Maginot Line was extraordinarily successful in deterring the Kaiser's grenadiers.