Here’s a letter to the Washington Post:
I’m no admirer of Sarah Palin, but I’m annoyed by a double-standard about her that is revealed by columnist Kathleen Parker (“The Palin Paradox ,” Nov. 10). Here’s Parker reporting on Palin: “She recently wrote against the QE2 – ‘quantitative easing’ – whereby the Federal Reserve will dump $600 billion in freshly minted dollars into circulation in hopes of revving the economy. Doubtless, this inspired critique evolved from Palin’s long years poring over the Economist.”
Parker is surely correct to suggest that Sarah Palin’s grasp of monetary and macroeconomic theory is worse than palsied. But I’ve heard no similar criticism, from Parker or from anyone else in the mainstream media, about pronouncements on QE2 made by Pres. Obama. Why not? There’s absolutely no reason (or evidence) to suppose that Mr. Obama spent his down time – when not community-organizing, teaching constitutional law, and campaigning for office – “poring over the Economist” or otherwise mastering the broad outlines, much less the finer details and disagreements, that are part and parcel of economics.
Why treat with respect Mr. Obama’s assessment of QE2 while treating with scorn Ms. Palin’s? Both of these politicians are posers, nothing more.
Donald J. Boudreaux