Why Time's "Person of the Year" is full of Crap.

[UdoKier]

They claim that their "Person of the Year" is about the person who most changed or shaped the world, whether for good or for ill, and that it does not constitute an endorsement.

But look:



It says he is an "American Revolutionary"


I would contend that he is anti-American, but anyway, "revolutionary"? That is a word with a DECIDEDLY positive connotation, especially considering that he is all about giving more power to the powerful and more wealth to the wealthy. What the hell is "revolutionary" about that?

It would be more accurate to all him a "Far-right radical", or at best a "radical conservative".


FUCK Time Magazine. A pox on its house and on the houses of all its whored-out "journalists".

[trotsky]

1. And yet the Repukes will STILL claim the media has a liberal bias.

:shrug: I give up.

[UdoKier]

3. And why the fuck are his eyes so damn close together?

Christ it gives me a headache. Even in a flattering portrait, his imbecility shines right through.

[thecrow]

9. And wtf is with that skin?

It looks like it's draped on in frankensteinish layers...
....oh.

[BrklynLiberal]

2. Consider the source...Time>AOL TimeWarner>one of the big media

conglomerates that would never really want to piss off the bushies...
It is just another version of ass-kissing, and a very public ass-kiss at that.

[LSdemocrat]

4. I wouldn't associate the word "revolutionary" with a positive connotation

There have been quite a few revolutionaries who are viewed in a negative light.

[Bluebear]

5. Indeed. If it were a Democratic "revolutionary" it would be "treason" nt

[greyXstar]

6. You beat me to it :) n/t

[Benhurst]

8. Obviously that's the way the Bush Crime Family feels. They are

busy shredding the constitution written by our revolutionary ancestors, even taking away rights such as habeas corpus which predate the founding of the Republic by four hundred years. The "land of the free" has fewer freedoms now than any English-speaking nation has had since the Dark Ages.

[EVDebs]

7. Time fact-checkers can't spell REACTIONARY so they spelled

it revolutionary (sic).

[saracat]

11. Exactly what I thought

[nascarblue]

10. A mothers letter to time

Rewarding Incompetence

by Cindy Sheehan, TomPaine.com Exclusive

A mother who lost her son in Iraq responds to Time magazine's choice for "Man of the Year."

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/rewarding_incompetence...

Cindy Sheehan lives in California.

Dear Time Editors:

My son, Spc. Casey Sheehan was killed in Iraq on 04/04/04. This has been an extraordinary couple of weeks of "slaps in the faces" to us families of fallen heroes.

First, the Secretary of Defense—Donald Rumsfeld—admits to the world something that we as military families already know: The United States was not prepared for nor had any plan for the assault on Iraq. Our children were sent to fight an ill-conceived and badly prosecuted war. Our troops were sent with the wrong type of training, bad equipment, inferior protection and thin supply lines. Our children have been killed and we have made the ultimate sacrifice for this fiasco of a war, then we find out this week that Rumsfeld doesn't even have the courtesy or compassion to sign the "death letters"—as they are so callously called. Besides the upcoming holidays and the fact we miss our children desperately, what else can go wrong this holiday season?

Well let's see. Oh yes. George W. Bush awards the Presidential Medal of Freedom to three more architects of the quagmire that is Iraq. Thousands of people are dead and Bremer, Tenet and Franks are given our country's highest civilian award. What's next?

To top everything off—after it has been proven that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, there were no ties between Saddam and 9/11 and over 1,300 brave young people in this country are dead and Iraq lies in ruins— what does Time Magazine do? Names George W. Bush as its "Man of the Year." The person who betrayed this country into a needless war and whom I hold ultimately responsible for my son's death and who was questionably elected, again, to a second term, is honored this way by your magazine.