[linux-help] Re: The Onion | Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'

[Dave and Cookie <dww@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

When I first saw the article, I was pretty sure it was a hoax.  It was 
just too on target.  I'm not a regular reader, but I was surprised I 
hadn't seen it before.  After shuffling through their archives I'm 
almost convinced it's genuine.  The copyright date on the page is 2003, 
but everything else has a 2001 date.  So being 95% convinced I have to 
disagree with Nate.

I found the Onion article amazing not because I tend to disagree with 
Bush though I do, nor because I particularly admire Clinton though he 
was/is  probably about as politically astute a President as one can 
reasonably expect in a popularly (read "Big Money") elected government.  
I find the article amazing simply because it was written within days of 
Bush taking office.  It really doesn't matter who's at 'fault' for the 
economic downturn, or whether or not September 11 would have been 
handled differently under a different President ( or would have happened 
at all for that matter if we allow ourselves to speculate on alternative 
scenarios.) 

The point is that when much of America was fairly complacent about who 
had just been elected/appointed (choose one) President, The Onion 
writers were a prophetic voice clearly stating things are going to be 
different under this guy.  Of course they didn't / couldn't know all the 
details, but  they did know things would be different in some specific 
ways and they made some amazingly accurate guesses on how things would 
play out.


Nate Bargmann wrote:

>Not to start a flame war, but this probably will...
>
>Let's say everything else over the past ten years had remained the same
>and instead of the constitutional amendment prohibition on a
>presidential third term, Clinton had been relected in 2000.  Y2k works
>out to be largely the nono-issue it was and September 11, 2001 happens
>along with the events that follow.  Would the tech sector and the larger
>economy look the same or be better?
>
>Keep in mind that the ramp-up to Y2k created a lot of demand for new
>tech systems from 1997 to 1999 and many businesses are probably still
>amortizing that capital investment.  Keep in mind that as early as late
>1998 I remember analysts forecasting a tech sector shrinkage after
>January 1, 2000 once all the bugs were settled.  However, many investors
>failed to pay attention.
>
>September 11, 2001 would have caused at least as much uncertainty in the 
>economy and possibly more than did happen no matter who was in office.
>
>I'm no fan of Clinton, but I do not blame his policies for the recession
>that showed signs of starting in the second quarter of 2000, before it
>was known who his successor would be.  My point is that it seems the die
>for this recession was set long before it occured and isn't the direct
>result of any presidential policies.
>
>The up side to the recession is that Linux is more popular and in a
>better position to be adopted and improved than if the boom of the '90s
>had continued unchecked.  Looked at it from that angle, then I would say
>the tech sector recession has resulted in careful implementation of
>technology in a lot of places based on cost/performance and not just a
>slick brochure and fancy sales presentation.
>
>Just my $0.02 worth.
>
>- Nate >>
>
>  
>


-- This is the linux-help@xxxxxxxxx list.  To unsubscribe,
visit http://www.complete.org/cgi-bin/listargate-aclug.cgi