Obama cites a “nonpartisan economist” — who also happens to be a campaign donor

“We have not found any serious economic study that says
Governor Romney’s economic plan would actually create jobs, until
today,” Obama said. “I’ve got to be honest: Today we found out, there’s a
new study out by [a] non-partisan economist that says Governor Romney’s
economic plan would in fact create 800,000 jobs. There’s only one
problem: The jobs wouldn’t be in America. They would not be in America.”

So… does that mean that Democratic campaign donors now qualify as “nonpartisan” sources? From the Weekly Standard:

At a speech earlier today in Cincinnati, Ohio, President
Obama cited economic analysis conducted by one of his campaign
donors, Kimberly Clausing, and called her a “non-partisan economist.”
Clausing, a college professor from Reed College, has donated to
President Obama and several Democratic politicians and causes over the
last dozen years. …

As we detailed earlier,
“Clausing, according to donor records, gave Obama for America $250 on
May 18, 2012. Likewise, on September 14, 2011, Clausing gave $242 to
Obama for America, records reveal.” …

In addition to her financial support for Obama, Clausing has donated
money to the Democratic Party of Oregon ($250), the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee ($500), the Democratic National
Committee ($500), John Kerry for President ($1,000), Dean for America
($300), Gore and Gore/Lieberman ($1,500), and many others.

You’d probably be hard-pressed to find any well-off academic who
hasn’t made a campaign contribution of some sort in their lifetime, but
why does President Obama feel the need to insist that his sources are
“nonpartisan”? (I, for one, will always remain highly skeptical that the
elusive “nonpartisan” beast actually exists.) As Daniel Halper points
out, chalk it up to “crony economics.”