Bush- "TIME PERSON OF THE YEAR" gonna run right out and get one!

[PaulaGem]

SHRED IT UP

PUT IT IN A BOX

ENCLOSE SOME REPRINTS OF SOME REAL NEWS

and send it right back to them...

[gizmo1979]

1. I think I'am gonna puke!

[Skink]

2. Shouldn't that be Chimp of the year....

He has an unusually high IQ for a primate. 90 by some estimates.

[Chimpanzee]

19. Fuck Time!

[meti57b]

3. That award is for the person who created the most news...hitler and stalin

were also Time person of the year. The award is not for excellence of achievement.

[still_one]

8. but they backed down on bin laden

because they were threatened with subscription lost

that was the day the media died in this country

[katmondoo]

4. Please DO IT

I will too.

[rainy]

5. My letter to the editor: [e-mail]

Dear Time,

I am disheartened that you would choose Bush as person of the year. How frustrating that the media is still not telling the truth about this man. He has lied his way into war on false pretences. If you think everyone was fooled by the evidence try reading some of Robert Byrd’s speeches on the floor before the war started. He stated flatly that the evidence was hyped. Most people paying attention, as a matter of fact, knew the evidence was hyped. The media, however, choose to ignore the proof of hype presented by Byrd, Scott Ritter, General Zitti, members of the CIA. Many were saying “there are no weapons” but the media only choose to report the official government line. This is dangerous. When dissent is ignored fascists rise to power and allow corporations to control the government. Bush is a dangerous man. He is not informed and relies on neo-conservatives to give him directions. They are leading him and this country down a path of war and destruction. He is responsible for the death of many Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis. How dare you honor this imbecile? This is a slap in the face of us and the world.
I’ll never buy another Time magazine again. Promise.
Sharon B.....

PS. The people did not choose Bush again. First they didn’t choose him in 2000 and 2004 the election was stolen again. This time the truth is being documented as I write and will come out in a few weeks to a few months. You may be embarrassed to have not seen his fall on the way.

[ivolsky]

6. using their standard, he is dangerous for America

Bush is pressing Pentagon officials to cut tens of billions of dollars from their proposed budgets over the next several years.

In a time of budget deficits the President and the Congress seek to cut spending, whether it be defense or discretionary. George Walker Herbert Bush, John Kerry and even former Defense Secretary Dick Cheney all made such cuts. Yet during the campaign, Kerry was attacked as being weak on defense, unpatriotic, and even "dangerous for America in a time of war"--because he approved cuts in defense spending.

Now, the President is doing it. Is he, weak on defense, unpatriotic, and "dangerous for America in a time of war?" Using their standard he is...

more:http://www.politicalthought.net">www.politicalthought.net

[dalloway]

7. Bush in good company: Stalin, Hitler, Khomeini

The Reuters release makes a point to say, as another poster just noted, that this isn't necessarily to HONOR someone. In fact, I thought the specificity on that fact was quite emphasized in the last line of this clip:

The winner must be "the person or persons who most affected the news and our lives, for good or for ill, and embodied what was important about the year, for better or for worse," he said.

U.S. aviator Charles Lindbergh was Time's first "Man of the Year" in 1927. Some selections have been notoriously unpopular, such as Adolf Hitler in 1938, Joseph Stalin in 1939 and 1942, and Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/19/time.moy.bush.reut/index.html

Still deserves a :puke:

[still_one]

11. don't make excuses for time

they backed down from choosing bin laden because they were threatened with subscription loss

[SueZhope]

9. Yes for ill & worse and the worsed EVER ......

I'm sure they had to have done this because he is the worse most ill person of the year.


they say
"The winner must be "the person or persons who most affected the news and our lives, for good or for ill, and embodied what was important about the year, for better or for worse," he said."

[still_one]

12. then why didn't they choose bin laden in 2001?

he did more to affect the course of the world, especially this country for ill

[propagandafreegal]

10. Time is fulla shite. nm

[berniew1]

13. What an embarresment to Time!! Since the election fraud case is documented

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=176532&mesg_id=176532

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x177375

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=176637&mesg_id=176637

[Ian David]

14. Time actually HONORED Bush

"NEW YORK (Reuters) -- U.S. President George W. Bush's bold, uncompromising leadership and his clear-cut election victory made him Time magazine's Person of the Year for 2004, its managing editor said Sunday.

"Time chose Bush "for sticking to his guns (literally and figuratively), for reshaping the rules of politics to fit his 10-gallon-hat leadership style and for persuading a majority of voters this time around that he deserved to be in the White House for another four years," Jim Kelly wrote in the magazine."

That sounds like "honoring" him to me.

[Straight Shooter]

18. "10-gallon-hat leadership"? All together now, DU'ers

All hat, no cattle!

Time Magazine is worthless, it's like Newsweek or what's that U.S.-named rag. They are the "Cosmopolitan" version of news, all style, no substance.

Don't subscribe to that claptrap, don't support them. Subscribe to something like Mother Jones or American Prospect. Please.

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. Just boycott the magazine this month.

Even better, if you're a subscriber, send it back and ask for a refund. Just for this month.

[Debbie13]

16. Hitler-Time Link, Bush is in appropriate company

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/archive/covers/0,16641,1101390102,00.html

[ooglymoogly]

21. there is a big diff here,

hitler was portrayed in very critical light and bushitler is portrayed in a very favorable light. i have canceled my slime subscription for good.

[TexasLawyer]

17. "A thunderous Republican victory--wide and deep..."

Some insight into the Man of the Year choice.-- As per the Weekly Standard, that choice was really the only way for TIME to avoid insulting our glorious leader!



Man of the Year
Time magazine can--should--must name George W. Bush "Man of the Year." So they probably won't.
by Hugh Hewitt
11/18/2004 12:00:00 AM

THE ALWAYS PROVOCATIVE Andrew Sullivan blogged on Tuesday about the Time magazine's "Man of the Year" process:


PERSON OF THE YEAR: I just got back from a fun luncheon for Time magazine, where a panel of me, Al Sharpton, Brian Williams, Alessandra Stanley and Coleen Rowley (the 9/11 FBI whistle-blower) discussed who should be Time's Person of the Year. My suggestions? Karl Rove, Muhammed, or a mix of Michael Moore and Mel Gibson. But as the discussion progressed, it seemed to me that the editors would have a hard time not picking Bush. Rove was critical to Bush's victory, but any Rove cover would inevitably be interpreted as some kind of insult to Bush himself. It would also do terribly on news stands, although the editor, Jim Kelly, said that was not a consideration. A generic person like the "terrorist"? Nah. Too defeatist and they've had too many generic persons of the year recently. And who other than GWB has affected the world more in the last twelve months. . . .

Sullivan can go far off on tangents, but in this instance he brought himself back to earth with the recognition that there is no other serious nominee for "Man of the Year" except George W. Bush. And Sullivan is right: "ny Rove cover would inevitably be interpreted as some kind of insult to Bush himself." Indeed, any cover other than Bush will be judged as an insult to Bush.

Which is why I will not be surprised by any designation other than the president. Time is nothing if not contemptuous of Henry Luce's original audience, and the tastes of Manhattan and the left side of the Beltway would love nothing more than to amuse themselves with the idea of successfully insulting George W. Bush and his red state supporters.

The weeks following the election have been a revelation. There is hardly a whisper on the center-left about being out of step with the country's majority, of massive electoral miscalculation, of chagrin at losing Iowa for goodness sake. A thunderous Republican victory--wide and deep--is almost a non-event for the theoreticians of the left. <snip>

MORE...

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/931yfrjp.asp

[pansypoo53219]

20. why is Time

pissing on 1/2 the country?

boldly fucking up the planet.

[KenCarson]

22. someone should do a gif of the hitler cover dissolving into the bush one

...

[Paintedlady]

23. I have to say it again

I just called and canceled my two subscriptions and made the lady note why.
I also told her that I will tell everybody I know to cancel their subscriptions.

[merh]

24. Hitler and Stalin were both named Times Man of the Year

thread with links and images of those covers at
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1441085