OK, I'm short on time, so I'll make this diary simple and sweet. I'm being a little tongue-in-cheek but I think I have a kernel of a good strategy here.
Most of us agree that more stimulus is necessary. Republicans won't pass it. What do we do?
We pro-rate 5 years worth of "tax cuts" (basically a lump sum) to small businesses that are actually creating jobs on the condition that they keep expanding their workforce.
So, let's say the "tax cut" represents $2,000 a year. The government refunds you that amount x 5. That's 10K in the pockets immediately in the pockets of small businesses
What's stimulus to a tax-paying company if not a tax cut by another name? The difference is really that "stimulus" is tied to some tangible benefit to the society as a whole.
Reagan/Bush tax cuts blindly hope you invest in America. Our stimulative "tax cuts" should ALWAYS be tied to results.
My second idea is equally silly, but I think it makes sense.
Obama tells the country that the future of security for the US is civil defense. Millions of Americans should be trained to identify terrorists and help in the event of national disasters and generally aid in the safety of the country.
So Obama proposes that we extend unemployment benefits indefinitely if you enroll in the National Guard or Army/Navy/Airforce reserve.
This would have a dual positive effect: it would legitimately boost our security and readiness as a country. And it would put money in the pockets of people that NEED it and that want to spend it.
Conservatives would have fits --- it supports the military and our general safety, but it's an extension of something they fundamentally hate (unemployment benefits).