Ok there are a few points to that site that are valid but it's surrounded by so much epic fail, they're hard to find. Seriously I don't know where that guy learned economics but he should ask for a refund.
Government spending stimulus isn't bad. It's not great either. What the Pres elect hopes to do here is to put money into the private sector while increasing federal debts in the hopes that said debt will stimulate more lending. The financial world is driven by debt and lending. If there was no debt, there would be no economy. We'd all be living in stick houses digging in the dirt for grubs to feed ourselves. Without going into a full explanation, banks ability to lend depends largely on the amount of debt they've purchased. Hence why all the defaults have thrown a big hiccup in the mix.
Now, I was actually watching cspan (I had severe insomnia and there was NOTHING else on) right after the AIG bailout when the committee met to discuss our roads/rails and transportation infrastructure. In a nutshell, it was in shambles from half a century of neglect. They were pointing out that without spending NOW we could be crippled within the next 15 or so years. What Obama has done is taken that need and packaged into a "Plan to invest and create jobs". Total BS but hey that's politics. At least he's tackling the situation.
So the fed will take on more debt and put money into these needed projects and because of the need, contractors will see a nice windfall in profits (overtime pay, high rates for services etc etc). In the end, those workers will dump portions of that money back into the services and retail sector. It's not great but it's a start AND we fix our ailing infrastructure.
Now as for the comment on lending states money. It's about as accurate and saying the moon is made of purple whale blubber and monkey spunk. However, I agree it's a BAD idea. Lending states more money makes them indentured to the fed. This is the exact opposite of how our government is supposed to work. It takes power from the states and placing more with the national government. Our founding fathers wanted a strong and stable government without making the states weak. In essence, taking power from the states is taking power from the people.
The public sector does indeed drive growth. Lower corporate taxes means higher salaries for employees and more jobs. I don't agree with the "TAX THE CORPORATIONS!" rabid bandwagon. They want to make money. They need to grow to do that. Growth of companies overall drives our economy. When you tax them more, they will find ways to pass that tax along and keep their profit margins increasing. To do this they will cut jobs and increase costs for services. It's just like raising minimum wage. Sure people on minimum wage will be happy at first. Until they start paying $10 for a McDonalds cheeseburger. Companies will pass those costs along driving up inflation cutting into the debt ratio that allows banks to make the world turn.
Seriously man, if you're going to quote talking points, at least make sure the guy you're quoting isn't talking straight out of his colon.
I have a word limit on my cynicism