Pangloss Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Time Magazine this week announced it's choice: Russian President Vladimir Putin. That article and the runners-up are listed on this page: http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/personoftheyear/0,28757,1690753,00.html If you were chosing, who would you pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDarwin Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 Al Gore seriously springs to mind. So does Barack Obama. Musharraf too. Maybe Amedenijad. Or Nancy Pelosi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 David Petraeus or maybe the American Soldier, even though they won in 2003. Many more people can see light at the end of the tunnel in Iraq thanks to him, now it is really up to the Iraqis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDNA Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 Hillary! NOT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 I'd say it's a toss up between and Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted December 22, 2007 Author Share Posted December 22, 2007 I'd say it's a toss up between and Ok, you never again get to complain about people wasting their time on television and Harry Potter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 Well, we already have stupid precedents like "the American soldier" and "all of us," so my vote goes to Athena, goddess of wisdom and heroic endeavor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Severian Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 David Petraeus or maybe the American Soldier, even though they won in 2003. How many do they have to kill before they get your vote? Or is it gross incompetence that floats your boat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted December 22, 2007 Author Share Posted December 22, 2007 The American (or British) soldier is hardly incompetent, they're just poorly lead at times, and Petraeus would not be one of those poor leaders, if the current military situation is any indication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 I think Putin was a good choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDNA Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 I think Putin was a good choice. From what limited amount of info that has made its way into my tiny brain from my own 2 eyes and 2 ears (incl casual discussion, internet, radio, newspaper, etc), it appears from my side of the fence that most people were disappointed with the selection this year. I tend to agree with "them" (which is itself unusual). Is your choice based on some positive impact or factors that you feel that he has contributed to the overall betterment of the human state or are you looking at it from overall impact (or potential impact) period to humanity and/or the planet? Of course since lil Geroge, Newty, Krushchev, LBJ (twice), Nixon, Khomeini, Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini also won in their respective time frames, I do conceed that your (and Time's) choice may be spot on. Although it is by no means equivical, one could make the case that Time Person (Man) of the Year can be the kiss of death for a person's place in history. The Man of the Year Winners 1927 Charles Augustus Lindbergh 1928 Walter P. Chrysler 1929 Owen D. Young 1930 Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi 1931 Pierre Laval 1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1933 Hugh Samuel Johnson 1934 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1935 Haile Selassie 1936 Mrs. Wallis Warfield Simpson 1937 Generalissimo & Mme Chiang Kai-Shek 1938 Adolf Hitler 1939 Joseph Stalin 1940 Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill 1941 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1942 Joseph Stalin 1943 George Catlett Marshall 1944 Dwight David Eisenhower 1945 Harry Truman 1946 James F. Byrnes 1947 George Catlett Marshall 1948 Harry Truman 1949 Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill 1950 American Fighting-Man 1951 Mohammed Mossadegh 1952 Elizabeth II 1953 Konrad Adenauer 1954 John Foster Dulles 1955 Harlow Herbert Curtice 1956 Hungarian Freedom Fighter 1957 Nikita Krushchev 1958 Charles De Gaulle 1959 Dwight David Eisenhower 1960 U.S. Scientists 1961 John Fitzgerald Kennedy 1962 Pope John XXIII 1963 Martin Luther King Jr. 1964 Lyndon B. Johnson 1965 General William Childs Westmoreland 1966 Twenty-Five and Under 1967 Lyndon B. Johnson 1968 Astronauts Anders, Borman and Lovell 1969 The Middle Americans 1970 Willy Brandt 1971 Richard Milhous Nixon 1972 Nixon and Kissinger 1973 John J. Sirica 1974 King Faisal 1975 American Women 1976 Jimmy Carter 1977 Anwar Sadat 1978 Teng Hsiao-P'ing 1979 Ayatullah Khomeini 1980 Ronald Reagan 1981 Lech Walesa 1982 The Computer 1983 Ronald Regan & Yuri Andropov 1984 Peter Ueberroth 1985 Deng Xiaoping 1986 Corazon Aquino 1987 Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev 1988 Endangered Earth 1989 Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev 1990 The Two George Bushes 1991 Ted Turner 1992 Bill Clinton 1993 The Peacemakers 1994 Pope John Paul II 1995 Newt Gingrich 1996 Dr. David Ho 1997 Andy Grove 1998 Bill Clinton and Kenneth Starr 1999 Jeff Bezos 2000 George W. Bush 2001 Rudolph Giuliani 2002 The Whistleblowers 2003 The American Soldier 2004 George W. Bush 2005 Bill Gates, Melinda Gates, & Bono 2006 You 2007 Putin PS: I personally feel that Hillary or Obama would have been great choices since, although I often lean the other direction politically (whatever that means), they are both breaking brave new ground for women and descendants of the African Continant in the USA and the World scene (btw, I realize that there have been women and black presidents and PMs) and I expect them both to keep doing it for a while. But I would have REALLY loved to see the Burma Monks get it. That would have been a choice along the lines of Ghandi. PSS: "you" in 2006 was a cop out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realitycheck Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 Who else do we see on this list? Stalin, Hitler, Khomeini Where is Osama Bin Laden, the most influential terrorist of our time? Because he just keeps getting away! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Severian Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 How on Earth could anyone think Putin was a good choice? He had just finished converting Russia back into a dictatorship by staging a rigged election, and he gets lauded by the west? Ludicrous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDarwin Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 How on Earth could anyone think Putin was a good choice? He had just finished converting Russia back into a dictatorship by staging a rigged election, and he gets lauded by the west? Ludicrous! It's not "best person of the year." It's "most influential." Russia is prouder, more prosperous, and more powerful than it has been since frescoes of Lenin graced Red Square. The Bear rises! (I'm a Russophile, in case you haven't guessed). So, yeah, I don't think its a horrible choice. Putin is the father of the new Russia. That's going to look a lot more important in a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 How on Earth could anyone think Putin was a good choice? He had just finished converting Russia back into a dictatorship by staging a rigged election, and he gets lauded by the west? Ludicrous! Recall the context of the label before attacking the choice for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_the_Year Person of the Year is an annual issue of United States (U.S.) newsmagazine Time that features a profile on the man, woman, couple, group, idea, place, or machine that "for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year." I can tell that you don't like Putin and his politics, but that's quite irrelevant to thrust of the choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 Well, we already have stupid precedents like "the American soldier" and "all of us" The problem with "You" as the person of the year was that it was grossly misunderstood. In context it meant you as a member of a citizen media / participatory culture. It did not mean everyone in general. Time was trying to make a statement about how in the new media anyone can participate, however not everyone chooses to. That nuance was lost on the readership as a whole. Ok, you never again get to complain about people wasting their time on television and Harry Potter! I'll conceed that when Harry Potter is making points about the cultural mainstreaming of anal sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettina Posted December 23, 2007 Share Posted December 23, 2007 "Person of the Year" should reflect someone you would look up to and Mr. Putin does not fit that description. I choose Al Gore. Now maybe that annoying "..it appears you have not posted"... will go away. Bettina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDNA Posted December 23, 2007 Share Posted December 23, 2007 "Person of the Year" should reflect someone you would look up to and Mr. Putin does not fit that description. I choose Al Gore. Bettina Al Gore certainly gets my vote...................... .........................................................................................................................................for pompus arse of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDarwin Posted December 23, 2007 Share Posted December 23, 2007 I choose Al Gore. Wouldn't that have been grist for Pangloss's mill? I can imagine that outraged thread now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted December 23, 2007 Share Posted December 23, 2007 He was the runner up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted December 24, 2007 Author Share Posted December 24, 2007 I would've chosen Al Gore as well, but it would have been a choice of influence not approval. Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons is a dangerous game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted December 25, 2007 Share Posted December 25, 2007 The Time Person of the Year has always been about influence rather than approval, which generally makes it much less controversial. You might love Al Gore or you might hate him, but you have to agree he's made a splash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted December 25, 2007 Share Posted December 25, 2007 They very likely would have chosen him if they were not concerned with it looking like an endorsement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDNA Posted December 26, 2007 Share Posted December 26, 2007 The Time Person of the Year has always been about influence rather than approval, which generally makes it much less controversial. You might love Al Gore or you might hate him, but you have to agree he's made a splash. Uh huh. Much like the splash that occurs just before the flush............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted December 26, 2007 Share Posted December 26, 2007 Uh huh. Much like the splash that occurs just before the flush............. Great. Al Gore is a doody head. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now