The Globe editorial page (June 20) provided opportunity for some heavy thinking. There was an excellent youth editorial advocating more local coverage in newspapers, a nationally syndicated column about Iran and Konrad Heid’s perspective on health care. All were thought-provoking.

I became distracted from those serious pieces however when my wife pointed out an AOL article on the new White House dog. Now that is a topic which really lends itself to political critique.

First, how do you house train a dog in the White House? Who cleans the carpets, or takes the dog for frequent walks, or teaches the dog not to chew on the furniture? Assuming that any unplanned federal expenses only increase the national debt, how many bonds and at what interest rate do we have to sell to China to support the dog? All of that is a fiscal debate.

The dog is mostly black with only one or two white spots. There is a complete absence of any brown or yellow spots. Should that be turned into a racial debate?

My wife tells me that the Kennedy family gave the dog to the president’s family. Is that influence peddling and should the president have accepted the gift? After all, we know how much Sen. Kennedy wants health-care reform to pass.

I assume the dog eats dog food and perhaps some table scraps. How much carbon energy was used to prepare the dog’s food? Perhaps he should only be fed “green” food. Do dogs like spinach? That’s an energy debate.

And then there is the possibility of a reproductive health debate. Should the dog be neutered or spayed? Is that unfair to the potential new puppies?

But then again, the presidency is a terribly difficult job. Maybe we should forget about the dog and let the First Family enjoy some quality time with the new pet. After all, the rest of Washington is going to the dogs, so why not let the White House join in?

Anson Burlingame

Joplin