Time Magazine's Man of the Year

None other than…

<a href=“http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/2004/story.html?cnn=yes”>Mr. Bush himself</a>.

Remember, of course, that Time’s Man of the Year is not (necessarily) picked because they have been the “best” man (or woman or group) or achieved the greatest good, but rather, determined by who has made the most news, gained the most fame (or notoriety), or achieved something beyond all odds. Adolf Hitler, for example, was once Man of the Year.

Given how 2004 went, I can’t say I disagree with their choice.

I agree.

Good for him.

Hall of Shame.


One word reply.

Oh wait.

I find it interesting that they used “person of the year”. It sounds so <i>bad</i>, but at least it’s <b>politically correct!!!</b>

>=( Steal what i was going to say will you?

But sometimes they choose something more abstract than a person.

Subject of the Year?

Time Canada had that dude that was deported back to Libya over certain charges but was then found innocent and allowed to return.

Yes, I cannot disagree, either: he did have the greatest impact on the world this year on the whole.

I think that they should say ‘man of the year’ when their choice is a man ‘woman of the year’ when their choice is a woman, and ‘person of the year’ when they choose something more abstract.

Bush & Hitler for a same “award”???
I don’t remember who i voted for. Was it Bush?
Time is right.
How about Newsmaker of the year? Sounds very PC.

Bush got Man of the Year twice now.

As for the abstractness, well, it has ranged from the whistleblowers of events like Enron, to the American Soldier (poor sailors, not getting recognized :frowning: ), to the computer, to the “Endangered Earth”. Yes, the planet once got Man (I refuse to say person) of the Year.

I’m still not sure what to make of 1990’s The Two George Bushes. I’m guessing it refers to some dichotomy in Bush Sr’s policy.