Oh, that would explain a lot. To be honest, this sort of thing has never interested me, so I wasn't entirely sure what it was about.Originally Posted by bennator
Still, its rather misleading to use the title 'Person of the Year', which suggests the person has had a positive impact on the world. Quite why an award such as this should exist at all is beyond me.
"The most important and recognize player in the history of the country."
Sometimes I wonder what my life would be like if I were as great as Paulo Wanchope.
I dont think he should have won it this year. Last year would have been the year for him. If i was him i wouldnt consider this an honor based on the lives ruined, and lost to achieve this title.
bTw i am anti-bush
Bush does not, under any circumstances, deserve this award.
You guys are bashing Bush for all the wrong reasons, as well as Time.
Has anyone considered that this was a below average year? Because Bush is a below average person, it makes sense to pick him in a below average year. Sure there's billions of below average people, but you need face time to show off your below averageness. That's what Bush did.
So the title is quite fair in all honesty.
If it's by impact on the world, I can see him getting the award, although it does seem more like good old American egocentrism. However, if the award is supposed to be about people who've had positive influences upon the world, I would say in no way does he deserve it.
If you look at it that way, Yasir Arafat is the clear winner simply because his death affects nearly a billion people.
Hence the comment about American egocentrism.
I disagree, but for different reasons. Time says that Bush "rewrote the rules of politics" or something trite like that. But I think people like Karl Rove would have more to do about that (and thus more deserving of the award, not that I think Karl Rove is a virtuous individual or anything like that).
So the things they praised Bush for are probably the accomplishments of other people.
Again? Isn't that illegal?
Person of the Year is about who grabs the most attention in the media.
In 2001, people were angry that Osama Bin Laden was in consideration for the cover. Because of business decisions, Time put Rudy Juliani on the cover. So PotY(giggle) isn't some award for achievement. I think that's what people have confused here. The headlines this year weren't really that great.
No, Bush is a winner. A winner of 'person of the year' that is.Bush is a wanker.
So, if I bomb another country I can win this award? Sweet!
Nah, you'll have to bomb at least three.
I only count two countries bombed by bush, not three. Which is the third?
Posting Permissions
