• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

TIME names Bush as "Person of the Year"

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MIMIC

Banned
And I agree...he met the criteria:

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,” [Jim Kelly] said.
Click to expand...

Time names Bush 2004 ‘Person of the Year’

Magazine chooses president for ‘sticking to his guns’

NEW YORK - President 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 on 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.

[...]

“Obviously many supporters of the president will be pleased, many people who do not support the president will probably sigh,” Kelly said.

“But even those who may not have voted for him will acknowledge that this is one of the more influential presidents of the last 50 years.”

Kelly said he and his staff debated giving the award to others including Karl Rove, the president’s influential political adviser, and filmmakers Michael Moore and Mel Gibson.

[...]

American 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 Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979.
Click to expand...
MSNBC

Successfully convincing people to continue to trust you after presiding over two of the most massive intelligence failures in American history (9/11 and the Iraq war...before AND after) should be applauded.

The PEOPLE on the otherhand...
 
M

MIMIC

Banned
:lol I heard that on MSNBC, a TIME editor said he won because he was able to "bend reality to his will."
 
M

MIMIC

Banned
Hmmm...speaking of which, there's an hour special on TIME's "Person of the Year" right now on CNN.

EDIT: It was only 30-minutes.
 
D

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Jim Bowie said:
Guaranteed every average joe will take this as Time supports Bush.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The majority of people don't know what this really means, and will certainly not recognize the "or for ill" part.

I was kinda betting on TIME combining Mel Gibson and Bush's efforts and going with a generic person like "American Christian" or something along those lines.
 
C

Che

Banned
I think that next year they should award as man of the year Satan. Afterall he's affecting the news and our lives for centuries now.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
Who gives a shit

Seriously, CNN spent an unhealthy amount of time yesterday covering this story, with it at the time being that Time was about to choose a Person of the Year. Ooh, we're on pins and fucking needles!!

...I think I need to eat breakfast.
 
T

tedtropy

$50/hour, but no kissing on the lips and colors must be pre-separated
pnjtony said:
Not comparing the two, but wasn't Hitler TIME's Man of the Year twice as well? I know of at least one time.
Click to expand...

Time's 'Man of the Year' award is not necessarily meant to be positive, it just denotes who impacted history the most that year, in their opinion. In those previous cases, who embodied evil and impacted the world more than Hitler at the time? Who is impacting world politics (negative or otherwise) more than ole' Bushy-boy right now?
 
S

Sinnick

Member
tedtropy said:
Time's 'Man of the Year' award is not necessarily meant to be positive, it just denotes who impacted history the most that year, in their opinion. In those previous cases, who embodied evil and impacted the world more than Hitler at the time? Who is impacting world politics (negative or otherwise) more than ole' Bushy-boy right now?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, when push comes to shove, Time won't follow their own criteria if it may negatively affect their profits. Remember Time's pick for 2001? Was it Osama Bin Laden? Nope...

Rudy Giuliani
 
A

Acrylamid

Member
Men of the Year
1927- Charles Lindbergh
1928- Walter Chrysler
1929- Owen Young
1930- Mahatma Gandhi
1931- Pierre Laval
1932- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
1933- Hugh Johnson
1934- Franklin Delano Roosevelt (2nd time)
1935- Haile Selassie
1936- Wallis Simpson
1937- Chiang Kai-Shek and Soong May-ling
1938- Adolf Hitler
1939- Joseph Stalin
1940- Winston Churchill
1941- Franklin Delano Roosevelt (3rd time)
1942- Joseph Stalin (2nd time)
1943- George Marshall
1944- Dwight Eisenhower
1945- Harry Truman
1946- James F. Byrnes
1947- George Marshall (2nd time)
1948- Harry Truman (2nd time)
1949- Winston Churchill (2nd time)
1950- The American Fighting-Man
1951- Mohammed Mossadegh
1952- Queen Elizabeth II
1953- Konrad Adenauer
1954- John Dulles
1955- Harlow Curtice
1956- Hungarian Freedom Fighter
1957- Nikita Khrushchev
1958- Charles De Gaulle
1959- Dwight Eisenhower (2nd time)
1960- U.S. scientists
1961- John F. Kennedy
1962- Pope John XXIII
1963- Martin Luther King Jr.
1964- Lyndon Johnson
1965- William Westmoreland
1966- Twenty-Five and Under
1967- Lyndon Johnson (2nd time)
1968- Frank Borman, Jim Lovell, William Anders
1969- The Middle Americans
1970- Willy Brandt
1971- Richard Nixon
1972- Richard Nixon (2nd time) and Henry Kissinger
1973- John Sirica
1974- King Faisal
1975- American Women
1976- Jimmy Carter
1977- Anwar Sadat
1978- Deng Xiaoping
1979- Ayatollah Khomeini
1980- Ronald Reagan
1981- Lech Walesa
1982- The Computer
1983- Ronald Reagan (2nd time) and Yuri Andropov
1984- Peter Ueberroth
1985- Deng Xiaoping (2nd time)
1986- Corazon Aquino
1987- Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev
1988- Endangered Earth ("Planet of the Year")
1989- Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev (2nd time)
1990- George H. W. Bush
1991- Ted Turner
1992- Bill Clinton
1993- Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk, Yasser Arafat, and Yitzhak Rabin
1994- Pope John Paul II
1995- Newt Gingrich
1996- David Ho
1997- Andy Grove
1998- Bill Clinton (2nd time) and Kenneth Starr

Persons of the Year
1999- Jeffrey P. Bezos
2000- George W. Bush
2001- Rudolph Giuliani
2002- The whistleblowers: Cynthia Cooper of Worldcom, Sherron Watkins of Enron, and Coleen Rowley of the FBI
2003- The American Soldier
2004- George W. Bush (2nd time)

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_the_Year )
 
T

tedtropy

$50/hour, but no kissing on the lips and colors must be pre-separated
Sinnick said:
Unfortunately, when push comes to shove, Time won't follow their own criteria if it may negatively affect their profits. Remember Time's pick for 2001? Was it Osama Bin Laden? Nope...

Rudy Giuliani
Click to expand...

Yeah, there'd of been a horrible backlash against the magazine at the time if Osama was slapped across the front page with 'Man of the Year' below it.
 
M

MetatronM

Unconfirmed Member
2002 and 2003 were such bullshit cop-out choices.

Picking the winner of an American Presidential election isn't too much better, either.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
Sinnick said:
Unfortunately, when push comes to shove, Time won't follow their own criteria if it may negatively affect their profits. Remember Time's pick for 2001? Was it Osama Bin Laden? Nope...

Rudy Giuliani
Click to expand...
I think the last thing they want to do is reward terrorists, even if it's infamy.
 
F

Fresh Prince

Banned
MrPing1000 said:
how ghey
Click to expand...
ta5.jpg

Shut the Fuck Up Terrorist!
 
T

Tommie Hu$tle

Member
2001 - was a real cop out Bin Laden should have gotten Man of the Year.

2000 - was a no brainer

2004 - I think is well warrented. Bush did and said all that he needed to say and do to stay on top.
 
S

Shinobi

Member
Sinnick said:
Unfortunately, when push comes to shove, Time won't follow their own criteria if it may negatively affect their profits. Remember Time's pick for 2001? Was it Osama Bin Laden? Nope...

Rudy Giuliani
Click to expand...

Bingo...took the words right out of my mouth. Their criteria is whatever's convenient for them at the time. It simply makes the whole deal irrelevant.





Socreges said:
I think the last thing they want to do is reward terrorists, even if it's infamy.
Click to expand...

The precedent (not to mention their own criteria) had already been set with the choice of Hilter. There's no reward for this anyway...Bush isn't going to receive a gold-plated stop watch as a result of this alleged honour.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
Shinobi said:
The precedent (not to mention their own criteria) had already been set with the choice of Hilter. There's no reward for this anyway...Bush isn't going to receive a gold-plated stop watch as a result of this alleged honour.
Click to expand...
Even if he was Man of the Year during or after WWII (1938 was before), that wouldn't be the same thing. He didn't go to war to draw attention to himself. Placing Osama on the cover, however, invariably with info on the relative issues - the man behind the face, would give him exactly what he wanted.

And obviously I didn't mean "reward" as being something material.
 
T

Tommie Hu$tle

Member
Socreges said:
Even if he was Man of the Year during or after WWII (1938 was before), that wouldn't be the same thing. He didn't go to war to draw attention to himself. Placing Osama on the cover, however, invariably with info on the relative issues - the man behind the face, would give him exactly what he wanted.

And obviously I didn't mean "reward" as being something material.
Click to expand...



Call it what you want. The world that we live in today was crafted by the actions of Osama Bin Laden not Giuliani. Bin Laden had far more impact than Giuliani in 2001 had the actions of 2001 not happened both Giuliani and Bush would have headed down a path of medirocrity.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
Tommie Hu$tle said:
Call it what you want. The world that we live in today was crafted by the actions of Osama Bin Laden not Giuliani. Bin Laden had far more impact than Giuliani in 2001 had the actions of 2001 not happened both Giuliani and Bush would have headed down a path of medirocrity.
Click to expand...
Yeah, so? I don't disagree with you. I was only giving an explanation as to why they probably went with Giuliani instead.

Oh, and I would have gladly taken four years of mediocrity, thank you. His "exceptional" presidency has been a fucking joke, no?
 
T

Tommie Hu$tle

Member
Socreges said:
Yeah, so? I don't disagree with you. I was only giving an explanation as to why they probably went with Giuliani instead.
Click to expand...

I see.

Socreges said:
Oh, and I would have gladly taken four years of mediocrity, thank you. His "exceptional" presidency has been a fucking joke, no?
Click to expand...

You and me both. The only reason his presidency has been "exceptional" is because the only people that have challenged him in any real way (no the presidential canidates don't count) have been stark raving madmen. Compared to that he "looks" like a damn fine alternative.
 
R

Rlan

Member
We have over 2 [or 4?] billion people in the world. You'd think that Time would be able to find enough people who have changed the world so they don't have to have multiple covers.
 
D

Dragmire

Member
There are over six billion people on the planet. But anyway, I think Bush's success has a lot to do with christian zealots who thought he was chosen by god as the next president to pick. Perhaps it was smart for his administration to appeal to those people, but I don't think it makes him all that important. It's hard to put a face on what was important in '04.
 
T

Tommie Hu$tle

Member
Do The Mario said:
The Award is getting even more Americancentric
Click to expand...


WHAT! Take a look around. The majority of the People of the Year winners are Americans. Time is an American magazine it will be Americancentric.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
[TNYT] Brazil Blocks X After Musk Ignores Court Orders
Social News Community 2
69
5K
ManaByte replied
NYT: The Palace Coup at the Magic Kingdom (Iger vs. Chapek)
27
2K
Tertullian replied
Elden Ring director Hidetaka Miyazaki has been named one of the 100 most influential people of 2023 by Time magazine
Game Dev
47
3K
keraj37 replied
What actually happened to Warren Ellis?
14
3K
CGNoire replied
Elden Ring creator Hidetaka Miyazaki named among TIME’s “100 Most Influential People 2023”
5
1K
Deputy Moonman replied
Top Bottom