Eric Martin has a rather scathing post about "Hoovernomics" in which he holds up Greece and Ireland as an indictment of those nasty, contractionary Republicans.
First of all, can we lay off Hoover? As you can see if you look at the historical OMB tables, Hoover boosted spending quite a lot (which is why FDR was able to run against him on a balanced budget platform). He boosted it even more as a percentage of GDP, because GDP had the bad taste to plummet while he was doing all this extra spending. You can argue that his stimulus was too small, but the popular myth that he slashed government in the face of a recession simply isn't true.
Second of all, the fact that Ireland and Greece are in the outer circles of economic hell does not "prove" that austerity is a bad idea. Both countries needed to do the austerity because their economies headed south; too many armchair economists have the causation running the wrong way.
Of course, one could argue that counterfactually, Ireland wouldn't be so badly off if it had done more stimulus and less austerity. But the reason that Ireland, and especially Greece, are doing these austerity plans is not that they're in the grip of some lunatic supply-siders; it's because they were finding it just a tad difficult to borrow money. A situation where Ireland ran out its credit lines until the word "declined" popped up on the cashier screen might well have been much, much worse.