THIS video is receiving a great deal of attention today:

In it, Texas Governor Rick Perry, now a candidate for the Republican nomination for the presidency responds to a question about the Federal Reserve by saying, "If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I don't know what y'all would do to him in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas. Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost … treasonous in my opinion."

Pundits will debate whether or not Mr Perry is actually advocating violence against the chairman of the Federal Reserve. It doesn't really matter. For one thing, crazier elements of society may interpret the comments this way whatever Mr Perry meant. And for another, even an entirely political threat is dangerous. Fed officials will not acknowledge that political criticism in the wake of QE2 has affected their willingness or ability to act. Yet it would be very difficult indeed to put comments like this entirely out of one's mind.

On the substance, Mr Perry's view is perplexing at best. American inflation is, if anything, too low. Mr Perry seems to acknowledge that the Fed could, in fact, boost the American economy, yet he argues that doing so would be "play[ing] politics" and "almost treasonous". Is the central bank supposed to ignore its statutory obligations in election years?

All in all it's a highly disappointing, if unsurprising, comment. As the Wall Street Journal's Sudeep Reddy notes, Ben Bernanke did demonstrate a willingness to face down opposition in courting three dissenting votes while slightly easing policy this month. Clearly Fed independence is less sacrosanct than it has been in decades, perhaps since the Nixon administration. A politically-influenced central bank makes bad decisions. If America is lucky, Mr Perry's remarks might spark a conversation about the threat to Fed independence and its potential impact on monetary policy. But lately America hasn't been that lucky.