Seems that he does not if you read his recent article for Forbes.
Although, normally, Barlett is a free-market supply sider, after the crisis hit he has been striking compassionate tone.
In the article in question, Barlett is defending the stimulus with the following line of reasoning.
1) It is true that the financial crisis was largely caused by the mistaken government policies.
2) But those who really suffer are ordinary citizens and businesses (whom Barlett equates with the market).
3) Therefore, it would be unfair if the burden of helping the economy recover were placed entirely on the market.
4) Therefore, the Government must step in to right its wrongs.
Sounds logical, right?
But this kind of superficial logic is based on an elementary cognitive mistake of misplaced antropomorphic analogy.
The following analogy is in order. The market is the citizens who need help with, say, a broken bridge which they cannot mend by themselves. And the bridge was broken because the government, say, ordered the constructors to build the bridge from wrong materials. Since the government is to blame it must act as a repairman.
But neither the market nor the government is an antropomorphic actor. Both are institutional systems - one based on voluntary and the other - on involuntary cooperation. What the government does is it displaces the market with relations based on involuntary cooperation thereby at best impeding its work. The government thus can only help the market by allowing the market to work not by further displacing it.