Yes and it's why I am unenthused with Schiff for Senate. His role is to tell us the truth, not what we want to hear.
Last year was a perfect example. Both candidates grossly lied about what they could give us. But Obama clearly promised the most free stuff and won. The voters demand the most unbelievable lies from candidates.
Republicans claim that ‘all’ tax cuts pay for themselves and more spending like nation building. Democrats claim a few millionaires and smokers will pay for all their new spending plus doing thing ‘smart’. Now they are sending out test balloons on taxing us, shock, shock
I am guessing that you mean that Bernanke, although his job is not supposed to be political, has nonetheless an unspoken political obligation to say optimistic things about the economy. In a sense, Bernanke would have been swimming against the current if he had been less optimistic (Bush and McCain: the economy is "fundamentally sound").
In fact, one could argue that a FED chairman who is too pessimistic would do some psychological damage to both "consumer confidence" and the "morale" of business investors. However, there is obviously a downside if a FED chairman is "irrationally exuberant."
My concern with Bernanke goes beyond the question of optimism though. How much arm twisting was applied to Bank of America to "convince" it to buy Merrill, warts and all?