Reference the Time Magazine response to the 2004 POTY inquires

[CatWoman]

Mike Malloy read it on the air, and made the simple observation: Time slammed Chimpy.

The key phrases:

The answer to that question could be a force for good (for example, Winston Churchill, Man of the Year, 1940; Dwight Eisenhower, 1944) or for evil (Adolf Hitler, Man of the Year, 1939; Ayatullah Khomeini, 1979). And to the latter, President George W. Bush must be added for 2004.....

[bettyellen]

1. I wish that was as obvious to others as it was to me!

[Cheswick2.0]

2. Good for them

I was just talking to a friend about this. He has not voted in 30 years and thinks all politicians are the same, but this year he started talking about what an ass bush is and is appauled that he is time's man if the year. I told him about Hitler and Khomeini to make him feel better.

[ailsagirl]

3. Except that damning last bit... which said he really won

...Bush has had his highs and lows over the past four years, but in the end he prevailed in the 2004 election by "persuading a majority of voters this time around that he deserved to be in the White House for another four years."

In other words, he clearly won this election.

That did it for me.

[CatWoman]

5. Sorry, I still don't look at that as a positive

yes, he "prevailed" all right.

[Pithy Cherub]

4. Enjoy subtlety as much as the next person, so why did Time

use sleight of hand rather than putting a stake in the ground. This "issue" only comes out once per year and Time played patty cake with it. The snarkiness is there butnot for the general audience. "Clues" are mostly for mystery novels and corporate America's financial statements...

edit: used the * spellcheck feature

[0007]

6. Happy Hoiliday sweetness!

We’re stuck with this one for all time, and we can’t take it back. History shall remember George W. Bush not because he’s a great leader, not because he was our idiot of the week, and not because he was President when Saddam was captured. Not even because he was the 43rd President of the United States. No what George W. Bush shall be remembered as is being the only American President in the history of the United States of America to be appointed.

He openly admitted to drug use. He openly admitted to alcohol abuse. He admitted to being arrested only after it was uncovered by a reporter. Which we might add was suppose to be sealed because the family took care of it. He even referred to one reporter as "a major league asshole." To which I think he is the only one that has met that qualification.



http://www.s5000.com/idiot_of_the_week/218/george_w_bush.php

[CatWoman]

7. Right back atcha, Hon

:hi:

to be honest, I've resigned myself to a second Bush "term".

He needs to clean up his own mess.

I'm delighted that it isn't getting off on a good start.

[0007]

8. ....am not at that point yet, guess I'm not as highly evolved as

others, still in a state of shock and depression.

[DinahMoeHum]

9. Time's phrase "for better or for worse" says it all.

n/t

:evilfrown:

[ailsagirl]

10. Maybe so

Part of Time's response reads:

The answer to that question could be a force for good (for example, Winston Churchill, Man of the Year, 1940; Dwight Eisenhower, 1944) or for evil (Adolf Hitler, Man of the Year, 1939; Ayatullah Khomeini, 1979). And to the latter, President George W. Bush must be added for 2004 -- there is no one else whose agenda and actions in the past year had such universal impact.

OK, let's strip it down to its essence:

The answer to that question could be a force for good... or for evil... And to the latter, President George W. Bush must be added for 2004...

Now that I've plowed through all the verbiage, it does appear that Time put * in the "force for evil" category. Unless they screwed up and meant to say "former" instead of "latter." But I don't think that's the case.

(Sorry CatWoman, I know I'm duplicating your post...)

[opihimoimoi]

11. Time shoulda shined him and picked Joe Palooka from Cicero or Bones

Stubblefield from Rhode Island, or......

[CatWoman]

12. S'kay

you want to see REAL evil?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x2270517

[burrowowl]

14. Ah! Sentence parsing!

Are you young? If so, this gives me hope.

[ailsagirl]

15. Only in spirit!!

(Plus my degree is in English)

[burrowowl]

17. Gee!

the Nuns made us parse in 5th grade and probably 4th except I skipped 4th. Sad that now days one needs a degree to parse and even one wonders if those getting degrees now can parse.
Grammar, syntax, semantics, noun, verb, object ....
Sound bites don't need no Gran Mar, sin tax ....

:shrug:

[ailsagirl]

18. Too bad Latin isn't required anymore...

I think it's important to have a little knowledge of it.

Oh well... probably part of the "dumbing down of America" program

[burrowowl]

22. As geometry trains the mind

for logic
Latin trains the mind for language.
Both very good for for developing the mind, especially 15 year-old brains that are beginning to really conceptualize.

[blackangrydem]

13. Clearly a letter written to appease angry subscribers.

I'd like to see their response written to those praising them for selecting GWB.

Time is interested in one thing: selling more mags than Newsweek.

[ailsagirl]

19. I wondered about that as well

What if one of us sent an email praising to the hilt Time's choice? Would the reply be the opposite of the one we've already seen? I bet they'll change ONE WORD...

What they sent to those outraged by their selection
====================================================
The answer to that question could be a force for good (for example, Winston Churchill, Man of the Year, 1940; Dwight Eisenhower, 1944) or for evil (Adolf Hitler, Man of the Year, 1939; Ayatullah Khomeini, 1979). And to the latter, President George W. Bush must be added for 2004 --

What they'll probably send to those happy about their selection
===============================================================
The answer to that question could be a force for good (for example, Winston Churchill, Man of the Year, 1940; Dwight Eisenhower, 1944) or for evil (Adolf Hitler, Man of the Year, 1939; Ayatullah Khomeini, 1979). And to the former, President George W. Bush must be added for 2004 --
==================

I'm going to do it-- right now.

[American Tragedy]

16. Why are people here so upset about George Bush being POTY?

I personally thought it should have been Karl Rove, since he managed a victory out of the worst and most vulnerable presidential candidate in modern history. He proved that one could win in America by appealing to the worst in human nature, which is a profound statement with terrible implications for the future. Still, Bush plays a vital role in that as well, since those two seem to constitute a symbiotic relationship, as mask and intellect. It's a very justifiable choice.

I would think that DUers of all people would consider Bush to have greatest influence in the past year. Our view of the election was generally oriented around our fear and hatred of this man.

If not him, then who should have gotten it?

[buddhamama]

20. yep-

nailed Bush as a force for evil, grouped him with Hitler. :thumbsup:

Heya CW :hi:
Merry X-Mas!

[CatWoman]

21. BM!!!!!!!

Enjoying the hell out of "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer"!!!!

Will be returning the original to you on Monday. :D

:hi:

Thanks, Doll!!!

[xultar]

23. Time has changed their form response...it is now kindler & gentler

and doesn't call chimpy evil out right.