CNN doing a piece basically nominating Bush as Time's Person of the Year

[win_in_06]

Nauseating

[AnnieBW]

1. I'm Already Sick...

I don't need to hear that. :puke:

[Moochy]

2. Didnt you find it funny though

The way they kept saying:
"the person who affected the news the most for better or for worse"

Almost apologizing to the 65%+ that thinks bush is a bozo, while muting the praise for him.

[atomic-fly]

3. I can see that

[sasha031]

4. I am so glad

to not own a tv

[Loonman]

5. Take the balls too, Wolfie

Yeah......you like that, don't you.

[ananda]

6. This is beyond insane.

I have no words for this kind of ....

Words fail me.

It's so unutterably....

[TomInTib]

7. Keep in mind that "Person of the Year" is not necessarily good...

it can also go to the person who had the most NEGATIVE effect (Ayatollah Khomeini won one year) in the year. Heck, I think Hitler won this as well.

I think our boy is pretty qualified.

[calico1]

8. Just remember...

"Person of the Year" does not mean "most admired" or "most popular" or "most loved." It just means the person who most had an affect on our lives. Both Hitler and Stalin were named Person of the year.

[win_in_06]

10. I know it could mean they had a bad influence, but how many

shoppers at the checkout counter will make that assessment?

Most will just say, "hey, Bush got Person of the Year again!"

[OKNancy]

9. Hate to defend CNN, but they have been featuring

different people every day for the past few days. Yesterday it was Bill and Hillary.

[LSparkle]

12. Has CNN done a segment on Cindy Sheehan yet?

Or:

Mother Nature (Katrina, the Pakistani earthquake, remnants of the late '04 tsunami)?
City of New Orleans?

Neither of the latter if exactly a "person" but "the American soldier" has won in the past, so ... why not?

[dave123williams]

11. I think this was for InStyle mag's 'butthole of the century' awards...

[Uncle Joe]

13. I believe they had Adolf Hitler as their man of the year in the 30s. n/t

[dave123williams]

14. Stalin, too - link.

(stalin)

http://frames.barewalls.com/frames/bw/52/52105,52302/11/14/closeup/j8cov1101390102c.jpg (the hitler issue)

[The Wielding Truth]

15. Seriously, I was just thinking that ,are we right?

[Uncle Joe]

20. We are right.

:)

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

16. I said it before, and I'll say it again, Time's POTY has become a joke.

They haven't done any "controversial" type of person since at least 1985.
One could make the argument that 1998's pick of Bill Clinton and Kenneth Starr fits the bill, however...I somewhat disagree, but can't
put my finger on it...maybe they made a half-choice.
If Time was actually serious about the POTY being the one who's had the most influence "for good or for ill", then
you all know who should have been their 2001 selection...
Espeically if you base it on the statement "they picked Hitler as Man of the Year!!!"...That was over sixty years ago.
That TIME magazine doesn't exist anymore. That quality of reporting doesn't exist anymore at TIME.
No, they wimped out and picked Rudolph Giuliani. Sales overrode journalist integrity.
TIME has become a pathetic shell of what they once were.

[Uncle Joe]

22. I believe the problem, is calling an evil person "Man Of The Year".

This to me, seriously erodes the definition of what a man should be.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

24. So? The one person that had the most singular effect on worlds events

"for good or for ill" in 2001 wasn't Rudolph Giuliani.
By TIME's own admitted qualifications, he wasn't even close.

Profits over truth.

[Uncle Joe]

27. I can agree with than. n/t

[last_texas_dem]

17. Bleh

Time has already given the dumbass the award twice and he's only been pResident for five years. In '04 I could at least see how he had a major influence for better or worse (for worse, in my view) but in '00 Shrub had done nothing beyond let his Poppy's Supreme Court cronies steal an election for him. I didn't feel that one was justified at all.

[GRLMGC]

18. For what?

As if this has been a good year for him. Person of the Year for fucking up things the most, maybe?

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

19. Rove, Cheney are more likely culprits. Or for the good how about Fitzie?

Frist for diagnosing Terry (incorrectly)from videotape?

Or here, how about Neocon politicos and pundits as a group for spreading the hate, the lies, and the insanity?

[peaches2003]

21. IF he should win...

If Bush does win the average joe will see the cover, hear the yak on FoxNews and will think it's an honor.

THEREFORE, it is our job to turn every copy of Time around at the checkout stands in your supermarket, so that the cover cannot be seen (and therefore not purchased).

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

23. Or maybe a little pre-emption. Remember for 2001 when Osama

was mentioned as a possibility and how upset so many people were?

Maybe if we let Time know how much we DO NOT want Dubya as person of the year it will have an impact?

[benny05]

25. Your reaction is same as mine, adding

:dunce:

[wisteria]

26. Oh great, last year he was chosen because he "stuck to his guns"

whats the premise this time, incompetant and wrong but "sticks to his guns"? I cancelled Time Magazine about two years ago. It has become a Republican Rag magizone.