Yes, I think he’s done some good for this country.
I don’t know.
Are you kidding? …NO!
0voters
Wether or not you may agree, it has happened. TIME Magazine has once more named George W. Bush The Person Of The Year. In the interview between the Prez and TIME, Bush made a rather remarkable comment about power.
TIME: Some people have said that in making your personnel changes for the second term, you’re consolidating power.
BUSH: I’m consolidating power? I’ve got all the power I need.
TIME’s decision to make Bush the POTY, (or ‘the shit’), has drawn up some controversy leaving some people to believe that by chosing Bush, TIME has lowered their credibility, while others think it was a clear and obvious choice.
[b]What do you think about Bush being the POTY?
If you wanted someone else to be the POTY in TIME Magazine, who would it be and why??[/b]
First, we need to ask: “what the heck is Time magazine anyway?”
It shouldn’t mean anything–really. It is a magazine who has to make money just like any other business. I think we still believe so much in the credibility of news groups and magazines in their reporting and editorial. I say it is time that we control who, what we believe and not allow magazines like Time, Newsweek, etc. to dictate who deserves what.
I wouldn’t worry too much about. There are more deserving organizations who confer honor to derserving individuals. It is up to us to give credence to them.
I am not surprised, because Time Magazine has had a reputation for placing quite infamous and despicable people in history, as evidenced by wikipedia.org:
George Bush was elected, because every elected President since Roosevelt was atleast Person of the Year once.
Let’s not forget that TIME is run by former Kerry supporters. The editors are making a judgement about which person had the most impact on American public life, not which person they like most. I can’t think of anyone who has had a greater impact than Bush…although that impact was overwhelmingly negative. I’m sure history will judge this president harshly, but for now he has proven himself a force to be reckoned with, and TIME is just being honest. This is an attempt at objectivity, nothing more.
Logo is absolutly correct. I saw an interview with the editors of Time on PBS before the pick came out, and that is the exact reason they gave. It’s about who is getting headlines – that’s all. I’ll have you know that they even mentioned Scott Peterson as a consideration.
for the sake of ammunition for bush haters: some guy from the nixon white house was on some dateline type show and he said he knew first hand how shady nixon and bushs white houses have been, and that bush will usurp nixon and go down in history as the new shadiest bastard to ever deserve a lot more hatred than he got. at least for his shadiness; i mean i guess what he could be secretly hiding is a bunch of great things that will show us stupid liberals that he is an altruistic loving benefactor.
Thank you, Aquarian, for that list… but I could not help but notice you boldfaced Mikhail “Perestroika” Gorbachev but not Kissinger, Westmoreland, Khomeini, Sirica, or Xiaoping…
This may come to pass if Bush makes one small slip fuck-up like Nixon…if the press unveils something disturbing enough to make Bush want to resign and admit his actions were inconsiderate to the desires of the people and only of selfish greed.
I think you ought to un-bold Gorbachev and add Pope John Paul II. Regardless of what one’s stance is on religious or moral matters, one ought be able to see how his stance against birth control is utterly indefensible.
