Time Magazines Man of the Year

[yeahwho]

George W. Bush (what are the odds I'll ever subscribe to time magazine (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apwashington_story.asp?category=1151&slug=Time%20Person%20of%20the%20Year)?)

In an interview with the magazine, Bush attributed his victory over Democratic candidate John Kerry to his foreign policy and the wars he began in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"The election was about the use of American influence," Bush said.

After a grueling campaign, Bush remains a polarizing figure in America and around the world, and that's part of the reason he earned the magazine's honor, said Managing Editor Jim Kelly.

"Many, many Americans deeply wish he had not won," Kelly said in a telephone interview. "And yet he did."

In the Time article, Bush said he relishes that some people dislike him.

"I think the natural instinct for most people in the political world is that they want people to like them," Bush said. "On the other hand, I think sometimes I take kind of a delight in who the critics are."

The Uniter Speaks :rolleyes:

[ASsman]

Yah, soldiers totally fucked up this year. No way they would be "Man of the Year" again.

[ASsman]

But they put a big red X on Hitlers face... OoooOoo.

[DroppinScience]

Dammit, he was already Man of the Year in 2000 too (which was completely idiotic, since he was only "Man of the Particular Moment" when many thought Eminem should've been given that title in '00).

[bb_bboy]

Hitler was Time's Man of the Year in 1938....so what the fuck do they know?

Based on this evidence alone, it should go without saying that the title is not necessarily or honor or meant as an indicator of one who does good or honorable works. It should go without saying ...

[Stino]

what are you guys whining about?

the people at Time's magazine elected him Man of the Year because he exercised so much influence on our society during the past year, not because the think he's faster than Superman and stronger than the Hulk,

i do not see it as a value-related (or how do you say that in English) statement.

[ASsman]

Based on this evidence alone, it should go without saying that the title is not necessarily or honor or meant as an indicator of one who does good or honorable works. It should go without saying ...
Uh actually it is, UNLESS THERE IS A GIANT FUCKING X THROUGH HIS FACE. Also, you have not read the News article, nor the actual Times article.

It might not be "value" related, but Jeez people, have some morals for God's sake.

[DroppinScience]

Uh actually it is, UNLESS THERE IS A GIANT FUCKING X THROUGH HIS FACE. Also, you have not read the News article, nor the actual Times article.

It might not be "value" related, but Jeez people, have some morals for God's sake.

They were considering Osama bin Laden for 2001 (but went for Rudy Giuliani), so it doesn't have to mean they're celebrating the particular men/men/person of the year.

But something awful tells me they're celebrating Dubya this year. :(

[ASsman]

They are.

"He is not the same man," Kelly said. "He's a much more resolute man. He is personally as charming as ever but I think the kind of face he's shown to the American public is one of much, much greater determination."

But maybe they are being sarcastic. I hope they are, and so should they. And as for more "influencial" . Bin Laden > Bush.

[bb_bboy]

Uh actually it is, UNLESS THERE IS A GIANT FUCKING X THROUGH HIS FACE. Also, you have not read the News article, nor the actual Times article.

It might not be "value" related, but Jeez people, have some morals for God's sake.

Here (http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/archive/photohistory/notorious.html) is why you are wrong, again. Your assumptions are always fascinating.

"TIME's choices for Person of the Year are often controversial. Editors are asked to choose the person or thing that had the greatest impact on the news, for good or ill—guidelines that leave them no choice but to select a newsworthy—not necessarily praiseworthy—cover subject."

[ASsman]

Step out of your box, asshole. I won't continue to waste my time until you have atleast read the link corresponding to this thread. I have made my case above, you may choose to ignore it. As you have on other ocassions.

[Rosie Cotton]

"I think the natural instinct for most people in the political world is that they want people to like them," Bush said. "On the other hand, I think sometimes I take kind of a delight in who the critics are."

I assuming he means those filthy left-wing homosexual hippies. Not soldiers and their families. Unless the soldiers and their families are filthy left-wing homos. Then he can feel free to hate them.

[SobaViolence]

why do we give a fuck about time anyway?

they were always shit and they always will be.

[Whois]

what are you guys whining about?

the people at Time's magazine elected him Man of the Year because he exercised so much influence on our society during the past year, not because the think he's faster than Superman and stronger than the Hulk,

i do not see it as a value-related (or how do you say that in English) statement.

Based on that it should have been Osama...

[afronaut]

Based on that it should have been Osama...

He was going to be Man of the Year in 01, but they chickened out.

[Whois]

for 2004?

Why?

He made one lousy video this year.

Hardly ambitious

He got GW re-elected...

[Whois]

No he didnt. Ignorance and lots of republicans did. If you really believe that then you arent realitic.

Fear...

Realitic?

[yeahwho]

well, I guess Monkey of the Year just didn't sound right

LMAO! (y) :D good 'un!

[Whois]

even goddesses such as myself make mistakes sometimes.

*genuflects*

"Oooeeeeoooo"

[adam_f]

I haven't been insulted here in awhile.

[EF shhhh Hutton]

GW Bush--man of the year. Talk about a swift kick to Liberal Nation's pills. Chalk up another "victory" for the "good guys" i.e. the Republicans.

Time is a respected journal. YEAH! (I'm now smiling with my tongue pressed up against my front teeth, both arms in the air with sweat marks under the pits!)

YES!!!!

[Whois]

Time's Man of the year:

1938 - Adolph Hitler

1939 & 1942 - Joseph Stalin

1957 - Nikita Khrushchev

1972 - Nixon/Kissinger

1979 - Ayatullah Khomeini

What distinguished alumni...

p.s. To be accurate shouldn't it be Cheney/Rove this year?

[valvano]

Steve Jobs should have been the MOTY based soley on the iPod.... (y)

[Rosie Cotton]

GW Bush--man of the year. Talk about a swift kick to Liberal Nation's pills. Chalk up another "victory" for the "good guys" i.e. the Republicans.

Time is a respected journal. YEAH! (I'm now smiling with my tongue pressed up against my front teeth, both arms in the air with sweat marks under the pits!)

YES!!!!

There are so many things wrong with this, I don't even know where to begin.

[yeahwho]

There are so many things wrong with this, I don't even know where to begin.

EF shhhh Hutton is back and gloating 'eh? Further viewing of past Time mag PotY reveals,

1938 — Adolph Hitler
1942 — Joseph Stalin
1972 — Kissinger and Nixon (double the evil at no extra cost)
1979 — Ayatollah Khomeini
1995 — Newt Gringrich


Fuck — its like the Noble Peace Prize in reverse

[ASsman]

It's actually by body count. Influence = Dead Civilians/Time.. no pun intended.

[SobaViolence]

Canada TIME had Mahr Arar

a human rights' crusader who was deported to Syria and tortured for a year...stupid america, you suck.