What's the Point of Saving The Planet if it Means Tough Economic Times???

Story out of Thailand over on MSNBC.com about the issue of Global Climate Change and a meeting of countries to decide what the world needs to do to stop it. 120 countries participated, but guess which one is weary of the recommendations? Yep. You guessed it. US??? Yes, as in the United States.

But James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, raised concerns about reaching the lowest emission targets proposed in the report, saying "it would cause a global recession."

"Our goal is reducing emissions and growing the economy," he said.

I wonder if that would be the same answer if an asteroid was detected on a direct collision course with Earth, and we only had a decade or two to stop it. I wonder if ol' Jimmy Connaughton from the White House Council would say the same thing about the cost of building a giant rocket designed to blow it up before it kills us all?

Oh wait ... nope ... that would be an increase is defense spending and there would be no argument over that one. Guess we just need Mother Nature to start really kicking our butts before we realize the need to sacrifice a small bit of our economy to save the planet.

Hurricane Katrina, line 1!

**Rocking quietly in the corner** Just 18 months until the election...Just 18 months until the election...Just 18 months until the election.