Time Name's Bush Person of the Year
Author |
Message |
Mister Ecks
New Server, Same X
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:07 pm Posts: 28301 Location: ... siiiigh...
|
Dr. Lecter wrote: Token Brown Dude wrote: Paris Hilton? What about Chyna? 
How about all celebs with sex tapes this year?
Time Magazine Presents: The Year of the Sex Tape Scandal Women!
_________________ Ecks Factor: Cancelled too soon
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:49 pm |
|
 |
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm Posts: 92093 Location: Bonn, Germany
|
Mr. X wrote: Dr. Lecter wrote: Token Brown Dude wrote: Paris Hilton? What about Chyna?  How about all celebs with sex tapes this year? Time Magazine Presents: The Year of the Sex Tape Scandal Women!
The list includes Paris Hilton, Chyna, Gena Lee Nolin, Pamela Anderson and Rusty 
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:52 pm |
|
 |
sako
Indiana Jones IV
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:07 pm Posts: 1684
|
That's the worst cover picture I have ever seen.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:54 pm |
|
 |
Algren
now we know
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm Posts: 68316
|
Person of the year to BUSH  no thanks
My choice would have been:
Kelly Holmes
Wayne Rooney
Michael Jackson
Sylvester Stallone
These would all be infront of George Bush in my opinion 
_________________STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE FREE TIBET LIBERATE HONG KONG BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:42 pm |
|
 |
Beeblebrox
All Star Poster
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 9:40 pm Posts: 4679
|
Algren wrote: Person of the year to BUSH  no thanks My choice would have been: Kelly Holmes Wayne Rooney Michael Jackson  Sylvester Stallone These would all be infront of George Bush in my opinion 
Or even Ricky Gervaise! Love that avatar, algren.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:44 pm |
|
 |
Algren
now we know
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm Posts: 68316
|
Beeblebrox wrote: Algren wrote: Person of the year to BUSH  no thanks My choice would have been: Kelly Holmes Wayne Rooney Michael Jackson  Sylvester Stallone These would all be infront of George Bush in my opinion  Or even Ricky Gervaise! Love that avatar, algren.
Ohhhh DEFINATELY GERVAIS!!!! forgot about him, oops!! He wins it hands down.
Cheers, it is a brill av 
_________________STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE FREE TIBET LIBERATE HONG KONG BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:53 pm |
|
 |
rusty
rustiphica
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:59 pm Posts: 8687
|
Rod wrote: I didn't say anything 
you said everything you hippy.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:46 pm |
|
 |
Shad
Angels & Demons
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:19 pm Posts: 233 Location: Iceland
|
Krem wrote: lovemerox wrote: lmao...I cannot believe this! The person of the year is someone responsible for thousands of deaths?!?! Sometimes stuff just never ceases to amaze me Person of the year is not the same thing as the goodiest person fo the year. Adolf Hitler was once named person of the year, for instance.
But they chickened out on naming Osama Bin Laden the man of the year 2001 even though they were under considerate pressure to do so. They chose Rudolph Guilliani instead and then wrote a huge article about why Bin Laden had not been chosen, and it was apparently because he was "too evil."
_________________ "Lick me in the arse, quickly, quickly. Lick my arse beautifully, really clean. Lick it, that's an oily desire. It's only good smeared with butter. Lick me, lick me!"
~ Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, "Leck mich am Arsch", K231, Vienna, 1782
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:53 pm |
|
 |
Algren
now we know
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm Posts: 68316
|
Eyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, Fonzie!!!!
Nice sig rusty 
_________________STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE FREE TIBET LIBERATE HONG KONG BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:55 pm |
|
 |
rusty
rustiphica
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:59 pm Posts: 8687
|
Shad wrote: Krem wrote: lovemerox wrote: lmao...I cannot believe this! The person of the year is someone responsible for thousands of deaths?!?! Sometimes stuff just never ceases to amaze me Person of the year is not the same thing as the goodiest person fo the year. Adolf Hitler was once named person of the year, for instance. But they chickened out on naming Osama Bin Laden the man of the year 2001 even though they were under considerate pressure to do so. They chose Rudolph Guilliani instead and then wrote a huge article about why Bin Laden had not been chosen, and it was apparently because he was "too evil."
I think that Osama deserved that one. Look at how he changed the world.
*p.s. Why you hate Turkey there shad? You think you're better then the Turkish?
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:55 pm |
|
 |
Groucho
Extraordinary
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 9:30 pm Posts: 12096 Location: Stroudsburg, PA
|
lovemerox wrote: lmao...I cannot believe this! The person of the year is someone responsible for thousands of deaths?!?! Sometimes stuff just never ceases to amaze me
Hitler and Stalin also were men of the year. It's not necessarily meant to be an honor, but a recognition as to who most influenced our lives in the past year.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:33 pm |
|
 |
Algren
now we know
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm Posts: 68316
|
Mike Ventrella wrote: Hitler and Stalin also were men of the year. It's not necessarily meant to be an honor, but a recognition as to who most influenced our lives in the past year.
Yeh thats true.
_________________STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE FREE TIBET LIBERATE HONG KONG BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:36 pm |
|
 |
Shad
Angels & Demons
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:19 pm Posts: 233 Location: Iceland
|
This is actually the second time George W. Bush is chosen as man of the year by Time. They also did it in 2000.
I'd argue that this award is pretty America-centric. It is very rare for non-Americans to receive it. Last time it happened was more than ten years ago when Pope Ioannes Pavlvs II was chosen.
Mike Ventrella wrote: Hitler and Stalin also were men of the year. It's not necessarily meant to be an honor, but a recognition as to who most influenced our lives in the past year.
It's true that Time has sometimes stuck to the criteria, e.g. when they picked Hitler and Khomeini, but that is not always the case. Like I have already said, they chickened out on picking Osama Bin Laden in 2001 and chose Rudolph Guilliani instead. According to stories in respected newspapers they didn't pick Bin Laden because they thought it would offend readers and advertisers.
This awards lost much of it's credibility then I would think. On Time's website, it says that the rule of selection is "Person of the year is the individual or group of individuals who have had the biggest effect on the year's news"
How can anyone argue that Guilliani was a better pick than Bin Laden, seeing that rule of selection?
_________________ "Lick me in the arse, quickly, quickly. Lick my arse beautifully, really clean. Lick it, that's an oily desire. It's only good smeared with butter. Lick me, lick me!"
~ Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, "Leck mich am Arsch", K231, Vienna, 1782
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:51 pm |
|
 |
Shad
Angels & Demons
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:19 pm Posts: 233 Location: Iceland
|
rusty wrote: *p.s. Why you hate Turkey there shad? You think you're better then the Turkish?
I don't want Turkey to join the EU. Unfortunately negotiations between the two parties began two days ago with Turkey wanting a complete membership after ten years.
_________________ "Lick me in the arse, quickly, quickly. Lick my arse beautifully, really clean. Lick it, that's an oily desire. It's only good smeared with butter. Lick me, lick me!"
~ Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, "Leck mich am Arsch", K231, Vienna, 1782
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:00 pm |
|
 |
rusty
rustiphica
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:59 pm Posts: 8687
|
Shad wrote: rusty wrote: *p.s. Why you hate Turkey there shad? You think you're better then the Turkish? I don't want Turkey to join the EU. Unfortunately negotiations between the two parties began two days ago with Turkey wanting a complete membership after ten years.
Why don't you want them to join the EU?
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:01 pm |
|
 |
Shad
Angels & Demons
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:19 pm Posts: 233 Location: Iceland
|
rusty wrote: Shad wrote: rusty wrote: *p.s. Why you hate Turkey there shad? You think you're better then the Turkish? I don't want Turkey to join the EU. Unfortunately negotiations between the two parties began two days ago with Turkey wanting a complete membership after ten years. Why don't you want them to join the EU?
Where do you want me to start?
1) Turkey is NOT an European country. Not geographically, not culturally, not at all.
2) Turkey's large size, combined with the poor state of its economy, means that the EU would not be able to support Turkey or absorb the possibly large number of workers that might leave it for the other member states of the Union.
3) Turkey would have enormous political power once in the Union. Its 70 million inhabitants will bestow it the second largest number of representatives in the European Parliament, after only Germany.
4) There are severe doubts on the democratic and secular nature of Turkey. The involvement of the military in Turkish politics is for example a concern.
5) The Turkish human rights record is poor and very far from European standards. Men and women aren't even fully equal in Turkey!
6) The Cyprus dispute
7) Turkey refuses to recognise the Armenian genocide.
Et cetera.
But we're taking this thread too far off-topic..
_________________ "Lick me in the arse, quickly, quickly. Lick my arse beautifully, really clean. Lick it, that's an oily desire. It's only good smeared with butter. Lick me, lick me!"
~ Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, "Leck mich am Arsch", K231, Vienna, 1782
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:18 pm |
|
 |
rusty
rustiphica
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:59 pm Posts: 8687
|
Shad wrote: rusty wrote: Shad wrote: rusty wrote: *p.s. Why you hate Turkey there shad? You think you're better then the Turkish? I don't want Turkey to join the EU. Unfortunately negotiations between the two parties began two days ago with Turkey wanting a complete membership after ten years. Why don't you want them to join the EU? Where do you want me to start? 1) Turkey is NOT an European country. Not geographically, not culturally, not at all. 2) Turkey's large size, combined with the poor state of its economy, means that the EU would not be able to support Turkey or absorb the possibly large number of workers that might leave it for the other member states of the Union. 3) Turkey would have enormous political power once in the Union. Its 70 million inhabitants will bestow it the second largest number of representatives in the European Parliament, after only Germany. 4) There are severe doubts on the democratic and secular nature of Turkey. The involvement of the military in Turkish politics is for example a concern. 5) The Turkish human rights record is poor and very far from European standards. Men and women aren't even fully equal in Turkey! 6) The Cyprus dispute 7) Turkey refuses to recognise the Armenian genocide. Et cetera. But we're taking this thread too far off-topic..
Just wanted to know. It's just you sounded extremly pompus with that avatar and the comments  Thanks for giving me a good answer though.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 7:20 pm |
|
 |
Chris
life begins now
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:09 pm Posts: 6480 Location: Columbus, Ohio
|
zach wrote: Token Brown Dude wrote: isnt the new president usually Time's Person of the year!?!? Seems like it. Had Kerry won, I think he would have been it.
I can't imagine having to look at him on the cover, lol.
I think it was a good choice, but obvious and sorta expected.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 8:27 pm |
|
 |
Groucho
Extraordinary
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 9:30 pm Posts: 12096 Location: Stroudsburg, PA
|
Shad wrote: This is actually the second time George W. Bush is chosen as man of the year by Time. They also did it in 2000. I'd argue that this award is pretty America-centric. It is very rare for non-Americans to receive it. Last time it happened was more than ten years ago when Pope Ioannes Pavlvs II was chosen. Mike Ventrella wrote: Hitler and Stalin also were men of the year. It's not necessarily meant to be an honor, but a recognition as to who most influenced our lives in the past year. It's true that Time has sometimes stuck to the criteria, e.g. when they picked Hitler and Khomeini, but that is not always the case. Like I have already said, they chickened out on picking Osama Bin Laden in 2001 and chose Rudolph Guilliani instead. According to stories in respected newspapers they didn't pick Bin Laden because they thought it would offend readers and advertisers. This awards lost much of it's credibility then I would think. On Time's website, it says that the rule of selection is "Person of the year is the individual or group of individuals who have had the biggest effect on the year's news" How can anyone argue that Guilliani was a better pick than Bin Laden, seeing that rule of selection?
I agree; just because their standards are one thing, it doesn't mean they keep to them.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:13 pm |
|
 |
Ripper
2.71828183
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm Posts: 7827 Location: please delete me
|
Shad wrote: This is actually the second time George W. Bush is chosen as man of the year by Time. They also did it in 2000. I'd argue that this award is pretty America-centric. It is very rare for non-Americans to receive it. Last time it happened was more than ten years ago when Pope Ioannes Pavlvs II was chosen. Mike Ventrella wrote: Hitler and Stalin also were men of the year. It's not necessarily meant to be an honor, but a recognition as to who most influenced our lives in the past year. It's true that Time has sometimes stuck to the criteria, e.g. when they picked Hitler and Khomeini, but that is not always the case. Like I have already said, they chickened out on picking Osama Bin Laden in 2001 and chose Rudolph Guilliani instead. According to stories in respected newspapers they didn't pick Bin Laden because they thought it would offend readers and advertisers. This awards lost much of it's credibility then I would think. On Time's website, it says that the rule of selection is "Person of the year is the individual or group of individuals who have had the biggest effect on the year's news" How can anyone argue that Guilliani was a better pick than Bin Laden, seeing that rule of selection?
I think we all know Bin Lden was the perosn of the year, but Time would have seen a severe drop in subscribers had they rigtly picked Bin Laden.
And yes it is a very US-centric award, the American media is not particualry balanced by whatever yardstick you use to measure.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:44 pm |
|
 |
sako
Indiana Jones IV
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:07 pm Posts: 1684
|
Shad wrote: rusty wrote: Shad wrote: rusty wrote: *p.s. Why you hate Turkey there shad? You think you're better then the Turkish? I don't want Turkey to join the EU. Unfortunately negotiations between the two parties began two days ago with Turkey wanting a complete membership after ten years. Why don't you want them to join the EU? Where do you want me to start? 1) Turkey is NOT an European country. Not geographically, not culturally, not at all. 2) Turkey's large size, combined with the poor state of its economy, means that the EU would not be able to support Turkey or absorb the possibly large number of workers that might leave it for the other member states of the Union. 3) Turkey would have enormous political power once in the Union. Its 70 million inhabitants will bestow it the second largest number of representatives in the European Parliament, after only Germany. 4) There are severe doubts on the democratic and secular nature of Turkey. The involvement of the military in Turkish politics is for example a concern. 5) The Turkish human rights record is poor and very far from European standards. Men and women aren't even fully equal in Turkey! 6) The Cyprus dispute 7) Turkey refuses to recognise the Armenian genocide.Et cetera. But we're taking this thread too far off-topic..
I have to agree with Shad, though I don't live in Europe, when I want to visit Belgium, my family also didn't want the Turks to join the EU.
Best ....reason..EVER
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:25 pm |
|
 |
Tyler
Powered By Hate
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 8:55 pm Posts: 7578 Location: Torrington, CT
|
Shad wrote: 1) Turkey is NOT an European country. Not geographically, not culturally, not at all. 3) Turkey would have enormous political power once in the Union. Its 70 million inhabitants will bestow it the second largest number of representatives in the European Parliament, after only Germany.
I agree with the other reasons 100%, but...
1) Yeah, technically it is a European country, but the vast majority of it is in Asia.
2) You think having those shady Germans in is better?
Anyway, a rather pedestrian choice, if not surprising.
_________________ It's my lucky crack pipe.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:38 pm |
|
 |
rusty
rustiphica
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:59 pm Posts: 8687
|
Jon Lyrik wrote: Shad wrote: 1) Turkey is NOT an European country. Not geographically, not culturally, not at all. 3) Turkey would have enormous political power once in the Union. Its 70 million inhabitants will bestow it the second largest number of representatives in the European Parliament, after only Germany. I agree with the other reasons 100%, but... 1) Yeah, technically it is a European country, but the vast majority of it is in Asia. 2) You think having those shady Germans in is better? Anyway, a rather pedestrian choice, if not surprising.
You don't trust em either?! 
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:40 pm |
|
 |
Anonymous
|
If the EU just stuck to being a free trade zone, there wouldn't be any of these discussions going on now. But noooo, they just had to go and create a doomed political entity.
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:58 pm |
|
 |
Box
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 12:52 am Posts: 25990
|
Krem wrote: If the EU just stuck to being a free trade zone, there wouldn't be any of these discussions going on now. But noooo, they just had to go and create a doomed political entity.
Good, I've found someone else who doesn't like the EU
Let's place bets- when will the union collapse?
I say when the Eastern countries will decide to so things more their way and try to push France to the side. Looking at how bravely Poland insisted on having the voting system their way instead of one favouring the bigger countries, I think the Eastern European countries really have the guts to shift it towards them.
Also, I cannot believe the Germans gave up the beloved Deutsche Mark for that joke of a currency! And the Franc is gone too! :?
_________________In order of preference: Christian, Argos MadGez wrote: Briefs. Am used to them and boxers can get me in trouble it seems. Too much room and maybe the silkiness have created more than one awkward situation. My Box-Office Blog: http://boxofficetracker.blogspot.com/
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 11:02 pm |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|