MrRant 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 Click here to see. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2GOLD 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 I have no problem with that at all. Considering this year, this seems like the best option and a good call. Very rarely do I say TIME made the right choice....but TIME made the right choice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Perfxion 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 It was either them or You know who with the basketball, so I am glad the correct choice won out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Mandarin 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 Eh, I think Mr. Rogers should have gotten some sort of recognition for his lifetime of work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cerebus Report post Posted December 21, 2003 I was a proud member of the US military up until recently. I rarely say this, but I'm very grateful to the people at Time Warner for this. God bless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 Lame... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MooreMark 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 Lame... Seconded. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
k thx 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 I'm calling publicity scam on this whole deal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Redhawk Report post Posted December 21, 2003 All this shows me is TIME couldn't make a firm decision in time. Isn't this two years in a row that the "Person" of the year was more than one person? Last year it was the "whistle-blowers." People might look at it as something cool, but from working in the journalism/publication business, I can almost guarantee that they were sitting areound, not able to make a decision, and then at the last mnute were like, "Let's just go with the American Solider." USually, when you're supposed to go one way with a feature and you end up doing something like picking a group, that's how the process went. Which is dumb, because they could have picked George Bush, Saddam Hussein, Kobe Bryant...it's not supposed to be "Good Person of the Year," just who made the most news. I think they wanted to pick Saddam but were afraid of the public backlash. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Firestarter 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 Sickening ploy. Time never supported the war, the country, the President, or the troops. They're just covering their rears by wrapping themselves up in phony bandwagon patriotism. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cerebus Report post Posted December 21, 2003 I'm for any support given to our troops, but anyone who thinks Time's Man of the Year matters since they didn't have the balls to make Osama Bin Laden man of the year in 2001 raise your hand... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted December 21, 2003 (edited) Sickening ploy. Time never supported the war, the country, the President, or the troops. And once again, the stupid assumption is made that all these things are one and the same. PS: This was the right move by them, IMO. Edited December 21, 2003 by Jobber of the Week Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest deadbeater Report post Posted December 21, 2003 (edited) Whether the paths the leaders selected are right or wrong, the soldiers make it right for everyone. Even though I was against going to Iraq, the soldiers there performed for the most part fabulously. So Cancer, never say the dissenters did not support the troops. We just don't support where they were ordered to go, as the government seemed to have lost track of Osama for the last nine months. cerebus, If the US and the world didn't recover from 9/11, Osama was not only Man of the Year, but one of the Men for all Time, for being able to topple two superpowers. But the US did, and Giuliani came to symbolize the recovery effort. Edited December 22, 2003 by deadbeater Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BX 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Stupid "feel-good" press. That's all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Sickening ploy. Time never supported the war, the country, the President, or the troops. They're just covering their rears by wrapping themselves up in phony bandwagon patriotism. You may be right about the war and the President, but how did they not support the troops or the country? Did they do something I'm not aware of? Either way, it doesn't really matter to me. I don't read Time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vern Gagne 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Better than last year's choice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob E Dangerously 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 I was ignored AGAIN by Time. Assholes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vyce 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 So Cancer, never say the dissenters did not support the troops. We just don't support where they were ordered to go, as the government seemed to have lost track of Osama for the last nine months. Am I the only one who finds it somewhat intellectually dishonest & duplicitious to say you support the troops, but then tell them - repeatedly - that what they're fighting for is based on nothing but lies? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BX 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Well, it's kinda like the son who goes and slaps someone in his Kindergarten class. He did something bad, but you still love him. Therefore, you must scold and spank him. I guess that's an apt comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Am I the only one who finds it somewhat intellectually dishonest & duplicitious to say you support the troops, but then tell them - repeatedly - that what they're fighting for is based on nothing but lies? When did I "tell them" anything? Unless you're lumping me in with people who hold signs where troops are returning to their families or something. I just think they deserve better, and voters should expect it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vanhalen 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 I may sound stupid here, but what about the British that have died in Iraq, are their lives not worth being part of this Time thing of the year? Or only american lives are worth anything in Iraq? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Redhawk Report post Posted December 22, 2003 I "support the troops" in the sense that I hope they don't get killed. But I don't agree with the reason they're fighting. Isn't that all that "support the troops" means, anyway? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jimbo Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Shoulda given it to Bush because he's done/caused so much good/chaos for the world. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slickster 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 I may sound stupid here, but what about the British that have died in Iraq, are their lives not worth being part of this Time thing of the year? Or only american lives are worth anything in Iraq? Well, the award is from a magazine with an American-only readership that is distributed only in the US, so.... the answer to your first question is apparently no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest webmasterofwrestlegame Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Yeah, fuck the rest of the troops that were in Iraq. I fucking hate American culture sometimes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 I may sound stupid here, but what about the British that have died in Iraq, are their lives not worth being part of this Time thing of the year? Or only american lives are worth anything in Iraq? Well, the award is from a magazine with an American-only readership that is distributed only in the US, so.... the answer to your first question is apparently no. You know, that is an EXCELLENT point, and I wish I had thought of it. Especially since with all the can't-we-get-along-with-France/Germany/Russia talk going on, it would have been nice to recognize all of the nations that are backing the U.S. up. But I guess that would mean TIME would have to admit that the U.S. isn't as isolationist as they, and other media, try to label us as... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Firestarter 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Yeah, fuck the rest of the troops that were in Iraq. I fucking hate American culture sometimes. Hey, are we still allowing foreign folks on this board? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Sadly, the TSM Great Wall is still under construction... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest webmasterofwrestlegame Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Sadly, the TSM Great Wall is still under construction... You can't block me out - I am British - we are your friends! (or so my Prime Minister tells me!) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Firestarter 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2003 Y'all talk funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
