I've given up on the idea that anybody really knows what they're doing regarding this economic crisis, so for me figuring out the best course to take is a question of gaming the possibilities. I see Obama as in a similar position to Bhuvan, the hero of the terrific Bollywood film Lagaan--it's among other things IMO one of the greatest sports movies of all time, even though it's about Cricket in 19th-century British-occupied India. Bhuvan is a young village leader who commits his village to a high-risk wager on a cricket match. He must pit his village beginners against the crack players from the local occupying British regiment. The stakes: The Brits have just doubled the tax, or lagaan, on the villagers, who can barely pay the existing tax. The Brits offer the villagers the possibility of paying no taxes for three years if the villagers win, but if they lose, they will have to pay triple tax.
So Bhuvan accepts the wager on behalf of the villagers who freak out at the prospect of paying triple tax, as seems pretty likely--none of the villagers has the slightest idea how the game is played. But Bhuvan seems to be an instinctive game theorist. The country is in drought, and the villagers can't pay the already onerous tax imposed by the Brits, much less the new double tax, so what difference does it make if they triple it? They can't pay the double tax, so neither can they pay the triple tax, so it's disaster either way. Better to take the wager, for at least there's some upside, even if it's low percentage. To do nothing guarantees disaster; to accept the wager is to choose at least a small possibility of a positive outcome.
So the analogy here is obvious. Standing pat regarding spending, as GOP ideology requires, is the same as the villagers just accepting the disastrous imposition of the the double tax. Going ahead with the spending bill is like Bhuvan's wager. Let's assume that spending unimaginable sums of money in an attempt to pull us out of this nose dive has a low-percentage chance of success--at least it will buy us some bridges and schools. So if both no-spending or spending strategies fail, at least with the spending strategy we add needed assets to the commonweal and put some people to work, even if for only a couple of years. So that in itself is a positive outcome. If we collapse, the world comes with us, and we are in a new game altogether.
But then it just might work--crazy spending could very well be the thing that pulls us out of the nose dive. To me investing a lot of money in the country's infrastructure seems to be the only smart strategy. The crisis calls for bold action, not GOP ideological government passivity. And besides, the idea that anything Republicans say should be taken seriously is absurd. They have zero credibility, and would be afforded none if it were not for the conventions and biases of the establishment media.