"In our present neo-Keynesian moment, economics has never seemed more bewildering and arcane, or more the exclusive preserve of hated 'experts' from the 'East Coast elites.' Most people I know, myself included, can't readily follow the algebraic equations that explain the 'Keynesian multiplier,' which, in its turn, is needed to explain TARP and the stimulus package. Belonging to a tribe different from Palin's, I simply take it on trust as a matter of faith that Paul Krugman, in his columns for The New York Times, is more likely to be right about such things than, say, Lou Dobbs or Senator John Thune, but I share in the general apprehensive fogginess about what's happening."
Though I lack his Nobel Prize and PhD, if his columns are any indication, I understand economics far better than Paul Krugman does. And herein lies the appeal of Sarah Palin: since our cultural leaders get (almost) everything wrong, why should we bother listening to them? Why not listen to the average American instead? I'm no Palin supporter, but her Krugman-worshiping opponents make her seem rational by comparison.
Incidentally, since I have not posted at length on Climategate, I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to deduce my view of Climategate from the above. Here's a hint: according to the left-liberal elite, the truth--or "truth"--is whatever the consensus of "experts" says it is. In my view, truth is the recognition of reality, which exists independently of human views of it. Sadly, with the exception of Objectivists, it seems that only idiots, religionists, and idiotic religionists reject the view of the left-liberal elite that its own consensus is synonymous with truth. Or, as they would likely put it--except when shouting "The debate is over! The science is settled! Anyone who disagrees is a Denier! We must take action to save the planet now or we'll all fry!"--"truth."