Miscellaneous nonsense

Consider some of the current nonsense we are engaged in. The mint is about to release another metal dollar, the Presidential dollar I think is is being called. They previously, as you no doubt remember, introduced the Susan B. Anthony dollar which quickly failed to gain acceptance. Then, more recently, they introduced the Sakajawea dollar which also failed to gain acceptance. In both cases they did not simultaneously do away with the paper dollar (as Canada did when it introduced the popular "loony"). It is perfectly obvious that a metal dollar is not going to catch on so long as the paper dollar exists (this has apparently been demonstrated repeatedly elsewhere as well as in the U.S.). So what will they be doing this time? Introducing the President's dollar without doing away with the paper dollar. So what will happen? It will fail once again. This is as inevitable as the changing of the seasons. I think there may be an ulterior motive involved. As the new dollars, just like the Anthony and Sacajawea dollars, will be a novelty for a time people will collect them and thus take them out of circulation. I'm sure this is happening with the new quarters and nickels as well. If this is not the motive why are they doing something they know will fail?

I saw somewhere today that the new goal of our illegal adventure in Iraq is to be "relative peace." Apparently even stability is too difficult an achievement. Relative peace is good as it can never be precisely defined. I guess if we leave Iraq engaged in civil war that might be considered relative peace compared to what is presently going on in that tortured country. Relative peace. I like it. It has a nice ring to it. I suppose that as Israel is not at the moment attacking Lebanon we can consider that relative peace. No doubt if we could reduce the number of deaths in Iraq this year we could claim relative peace there as well. Relative peace would seem to be a bit of a come down from a fully Democratic society that would be an example for all of the Middle East. But, as Tony Snow, that apparently completely mindless Presidential spokesman assured us, "you can't predict what will happen when you go to "war."

No one seems to be quite certain what Iran is doing in Iraq. At a special more or less secret session in Bagdad three anonymous guys claimed to show us evidence of Iranian arms that were found in Iraq. It was also suggested that high level government officials in Iran were responsible. But then General Pace said no, there was no evidence that the Iranian government was involved. Then today (or maybe it was yesterday, I can't tear myself away from the Anna Nicole Smith case long enough to keep track of the days) Bush himself said we didn't know that higher officials in Iran necessarily knew about what was going on. But we did know for certain that Iranian munitions were being used in Iraq. Imagine that! Someone is helping to arm the Iraqis to defend themselves against an occupying force. This is similar to our objection to Russia selling anti-aircraft guns to Iran (we like our victims to be as helpless as possible). Might the Iraqis have purchased these weapons on the gigantic munitions black market? Might they have acquired them from Hezbolla? Perhaps the Iraqi Santa Claus brought them. No, Bush says they came from an organization that is part of the Iranian government (but he hedges by saying he doesn't know if the Iranian government is aware of this). Wowie, zowie! What intelligence! It's not even as convincing as the evidence they fabricated to attack Iraq. Happily, no one in the Bush administration has enough credibility to get away with this nonsense. And by the way, they know that precisely 170 troops have been killed by these Iranian munitions. How do they know this? I guess they must have interviewed the dead and asked them what, precisely, was the munition that killed them. This whole business has such an overwhelming smell of inauthenticity that one doesn't know whether to laugh or stick one's head in the garbage in the hopes of finding a more pleasant odor. However unfortunate it is, I do not believe ANYTHING that comes from the Bush/Cheney den of vipers.

Just out of idle curiosity, does anyone ever actually pay attention to tv commercials? That is, do they ever consider what is being claimed in these basically offensive interruptions? I saw recently an ad for something called Boniva. I don't recall even what Boniva is, or is for. But what got me was the claim by the woman in the ad that her friend had to set aside one day a week to take her pill (whereas with Boniva she only had to take it once a month). Think of that! She had to set aside one day a week to take a pill that probably took less than 10 seconds to swallow. What a burden! What a terrible inconvenience! Thank god for Boniva (whatever it is). But don't let me get started on advertising.