When ideology trumps reality, political parties enter a dead zone where no facts can be marshalled and politicians seem to live in a truth-free world. Take Mitt Romney this morning.

Romney said on CBS's "The Early Show" that the administration's stimulus plan "didn't work" and he said the reason things seem to be ticking up in the business world is because the "private sector" has regained its equilibrium on its own.

The reality as Paul Krugman points out is the opposite of what Romney contends.

Not that long ago the U.S. economy was in free fall. Without the recovery act, the free fall would probably have continued, as unemployed workers slashed their spending, cash-strapped state and local governments engaged in mass layoffs, and more.

But now, pushed by the new found Republican fear of deficits (when did that ever stop Reagan or Bush from pushing Pentagon budgets through the roof?) and centrist Democrats lack of economic literacy, the thought is: "the recessions over, lets cut spending." But Krugman points out the fallacy.

Suppose that the economy were to keep growing at 3.5 percent. If that happened, unemployment would eventually start falling -- but very, very slowly. The experience of the Clinton era, when the economy grew at an average rate of 3.7 percent for eight years (did you know that?) suggests that at current growth rates we'd be lucky to see the unemployment rate fall by half a percentage point per year, meaning that it would take a decade to return to something like full employment.

Worse yet, it's far from clear that growth will continue at this rate. The effects of the stimulus will build over time -- it's still likely to create or save a total of around three million jobs -- but its peak impact on the growth of G.D.P. (as opposed to its level) is already behind us. Solid growth will continue only if private spending takes up the baton as the effect of the stimulus fades. And so far there's no sign that this is happening.

So the government needs to do much more. Unfortunately, the political prospects for further action aren't good.

Friday's consumption report shows that for the first time in two decades, American's are learning how to save. For the long-term health of our economy this is a good thing. But the for the short-term prospects of an economy addicted to consumer spending (72% compared to China's 38% and Germany's 51%), it means that the private sector will not be providing any jobs soon. In fact, I'm guessing that after Christmas a lot more retail stores will close, bringing with it the possibility of a double dip recession.

Tom Friedman suggested that the reason that Obama has not been able to get everyone on board politically is that he hasn't brought all the threads together.

He has not tied all his programs into a single narrative that shows the links between his health care, banking, economic, climate, energy, education and foreign policies. Such a narrative would enable each issue and each constituency to reinforce the other and evoke the kind of popular excitement that got him elected...

What is that project? What is that narrative? Quite simply it is nation-building at home. It is nation-building in America.

I've always believed that Mr. Obama was elected because a majority of Americans fear that we're becoming a declining great power. Everything from our schools to our energy and transportation systems are falling apart and in need of reinvention and reinvigoration. And what people want most from Washington today is nation-building at home.

Here's the deal. It's time to stop the $2 Trillion nation-building program in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring the money and troops home. We have a much more important nation-building project called the United States of America.