Will Ron Paul be wearing eyebrow toupees at tomorrow’s CNN political debate?

We ask this delicate question only because it came up following the most recent wrangle of GOP presidential candidates. Photos showed what appeared to be a false eyebrow, or perhaps a wooly bear caterpillar, drooping off one of Mr. Paul’s eyes.

If you really want to, you can view the incident in a Twitpic sent out by Jon Stewart – who, as we’ve previously noted, is something of a Ron Paul fan boy.

Now before we get too far into this, and angry Paulites crash our e-mail, jam our phones, and generally render moot our attempts at electronic interaction with the world, we’ll get to Paul’s new budget proposal in a moment.

We’re just getting the eyebrow thing out of the way first.

The Paul campaign thinks the wayward-brow stories are silly, of course. Campaign spokesman Jesse Benton has called the fake-brow theory “stupid” and “insulting.”

Our take on it is this: the charge of artificial enhancement makes no sense. Fake eyebrows on a no-longer 20-year-old guy? Yes, we know The New York Times says it’s a flourishing business. But they’ve also run stories on how city hipsters are hot for designer axes. Just because it’s a trend in NoMoSoHo doesn’t mean it’s a thing in, you know, the actual world.

Take it from us. Unfortunately, we know. When you reach a certain age, the nice young woman cutting your hair starts to trim your eyebrows, not enhance them. That’s because with age comes wisdom, and also eyebrow hairs that shoot off your forehead like rocket contrails.

If you don’t trim your eyebrows, you begin to look like the kind of person who buttons up their cardigan wrong, then forgets where they put their sandwich. Or like Ed Asner, only thinner, with a bit more hair.

So, yes, Rick Perry’s got plush brows, and so does Mitt Romney. What we’re saying is, that from our point of view, that’s not necessarily a positive sign.

The $1 trillion plan

Moving along, Ron Paul himself, ignoring Browgate (Browmagedon?) today announced an economic plan that cuts $1 trillion off the federal budget, eliminates no fewer than five federal departments, including the venerable Department of the Interior, slashes Environmental Protection Agency funding by 30 percent, and ends funding of foreign wars.

Take that, slackers! We’re looking at you, Herman Cain and Mitt Romney. Paul’s pie charts are much tougher than yours.

“It’s the only plan offered by a presidential candidate that actually balances the budget and begins to pay down the debt,” says the aforementioned Paul campaign spokesman Mr. Benton.

Our favorite part is that Paul would reduce the president’s salary to $39k and change, which is the median US income. That’s a good idea – too often presidents become disconnected from economic reality, given that they seldom run out to Dunkin’ to pick up a glazed stick and a medium hot beverage.

But what about a performance bonus? That might serve a purpose too. Like, if unemployment drops a percentage point, the presidents gets 10 percent for the year, or maybe another week of vacation. Their choice.

Even better – a free eyebrow trim. We know a stylist who’d be happy to oblige.