As it became more undeniable in recent weeks that Obama's Stimulus Economy is a spectacular failure, Liberals went into spin gear claiming that if only the Stimulus was larger, if only it was $1.2 trillion as Ms. Christina Romer wanted, things would have been great.

It may sell for a talking-point, but let's look at three points:

1) Until recently, Dems pointed out how "worse" things could have been if not for the Stimulus - despite the fact that the Stimulus promised great times, not "could have been worse" times. Regardless, the Stimulus - according to the Left - was a success because things could have been worse. Therefore one would wonder, why the need for the recent spin?

2) If the initial $800 billion Stimulus gave us despair (during the first twelve Stimulus months, we lost way more jobs than the amount lost in the twelve months leading up to the Obama/Dems win in November 2008), why should we think that increasing the Stimulus by 50% would have given us a flourishing economy?

3) The Stimulus was indeed more than $1 trillion! If you add up all the "jobs bills" that the Dems passed and pushed through since the original Stimulus (and if you also add up the additional in-budget spending that the Dems gave us under the name of "fixing the economy"), you easily pass the $1.2 trillion mark. This little fact renders as junk the spin that if only we had a $1.2 trillion Stimulus, all would have been great.

As always, facts don't matter to some when it gets in the way of their agenda and ideology...