According to Time magazine:

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul said Monday that Washington lawmakers are showing no consideration for future generations with deficit spending that is passing an "enormous burden of debt" on to America's children and grandchildren.

The article continues:

"I acknowledge that the system is broken, and if we just keep borrowing, we could destroy the entire system," Paul said. "Then, there would be no Social Security, no Medicare and no government because we will be drowning in the sea of debt or destroy the currency in the process."

Politicians have long been invoking a tremendous concern for future generations while railing against deficit spending.  But, the phrase “drowning in the sea” got me thinking: 

I wonder if Dr. Paul’s concern for future generations extends to topics like climate change.  Does he realize, for example, that if the polar ice caps continue to melt at their current pace, future generations of American coastal and lowland residents – from New York, Washington D.C., Miami, New Orleans, Houston, Chicago, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego – will literally be “drowning in the sea?”

So, I went to www.RandPaul2010.com to see what his position is on the topic.  Neither I, nor Google could find any references to climate change or global warming.

The closest I could get was Dr. Paul’s discussion of clean, cheap energy under the heading Energy Innovation.  As it turns out, the reason we don’t have clean, cheap energy is that the government has been subsidizing wind and solar energy.  Apparently, the federal subsidies for wind and solar are preventing the free market from finding and surfacing cleaner, less expensive forms of energy than oil and coal. 

Who knew?

Setting aside for a moment the notion that any new energy source can compete with the infrastructure and economies of scale present in our current fossil-fuel based economy, let’s take the doctor at his word.

If we assume that solar and wind are too cheap because the government is artificially suppressing their prices, then perhaps we should also consider that coal and oil are too cheap because much of their true cost is externalized by the free market.  For example:

• How much more expensive would coal and oil be if we forced companies like Massey Energy and British Petroleum to mine their products safely, and clean up after themselves?
• And, how much more expensive would carbon based fuels be if we could put a fair price on the costs associated with mitigating the environmental impacts of burning these products and include it at the pump?

I am all for creative solutions to finding cleaner, less expensive energy.  And, maybe the market can find an answer without subsidies.  (Bullshit!)  But, frankly, given his concern about the financial well being of future generations of Americans, I’m a bit confused by Dr. Paul’s apparent lack of concern for their health and well being.  The man is a doctor, isn’t he?

Oh, but, he is running in Kentucky, a once mountainous state.  Perhaps he doesn’t see the connection between how mountain top mining and rising sea levels might affect his state.  Or, maybe he thinks he’s got a better chance of making a long lasting impact if all those cities I mentioned end up under water.  They're mostly blue already, you know.

UPDATE:  Oh, and it wouldn't hurt Dr. Paul to start talking about doing away with the federal subsidies for dirty energy.

 You should really read this article about a single letter sent to the President and his reply.  It's that good.

They know of that which they speak... 

Today, on NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me!, author and radio voice Tom Bodett offered this analogy for the claims being put forth by former Vice President Dick Cheney and others that so called "enhanced interrogation techniques" (a.k.a. torture) produced valuable information in the fight against al-Qaeda:

That's like... you accuse a shoplifter of stealing, [and] he says, "Well, call it what you want; but look at all this great stuff I got."

Listen to it here. The exchange begins at 5:32. 

The resemblance between U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Judge Doom of Roger Rabbit fame has been duly noted (here and here). But, has anyone yet pointed out the similarity between their speaking styles?

They both seem to want to wring a topic for all it is worth. Seriously! Google Henry Paulson images and check out how many look like he's trying to choke something. Yikes!

And, then, there's this:

Looks like I was not the only one with this idea.  I suppose there's no point squandering all that Nobel-laureate chi on politics.  I guess that's why Al Gore has shown so little interest in returning to public life, also.

It's been a while since I strayed into the realm of politics, but I cannot help but point out what a fine Treasury Secretary Nobel-laureate Paul Krugman would make, especially given his correct predictions regarding the housing bubble, his research on currency and crises, and his reasonable approach to the current Wall Street bailout.  This country could do a hell of a lot worse - and has.  (Hey, and my track record isn't bad!)

You may have seen a commercial staring a crusty old oil man from Texas named T. Boone Pickens, talking about reducing our dependence on foreign oil.  Watch this video to find out more about his plan - or you can go to his site and see for yourself what he's doing.

Here's an interesting read regarding whether to use paper or plastic bags.

Senator Joseph Biden (D - Delaware) makes a strong case for Senator Barack Obama to choose him as his running mate, here.  All that foreign policy experience would go a long way toward shoring up Senator Obama's perceived weakness in this area.  Alternatively, Senator Biden would make an excellent choice for Secretary of State.