http://www.time.com/time/specials/2...ticle/0,28804,1690753_1690757_1696150,00.html What disturbs me about this is not the selection of Putin, as the editors note Stalin was picked twice, but the fact Time seems to think the verdict on Putin is not in yet. Newsflash. The verdict is in, and it's not positive.
LOL, its not like its for Humanitarian of the Year. I think he flies under the radar for a lot of people. Giving him this kinda throws a flag up for a lot of people. They think Russia is a poor dying country. They don't realize exactly Putin is capable of.
Time's man of the year has always been quirky even before quirky was fashionable. The resurgence of the Russians is welcome given what the US has done with its autocracy. And to think that we all welcomed the end of the Cold War???? How foolish and optimistic we were to think that it would bring in an era of co-operation and peace.
Wasnt Bush Jr man of the year too ? What doest that and this Putin case tell about that magazine...?.
What you quoted from Time was probably true until 10 years ago. Since then it has been a popularity contest. After 9/11 OBL should have been the Person of the Year (just like Hitler and Saddam were at one time) but they got so many threats from subscribers, that they went with Rudy... That tells a lot about journalistic integrity. POTY was always an advertising gimmick and most of the time irrelevant...
I think you guys missed my initial point. To reiterate, I'm not questioning the fact they picked Putin. I think he's a reasonable choice, and much better than the other candidates. I'm surprised that they think the verdict is still out on him. I think the verdict is in on the man and has been for some time. He's a corrupt tyrant/strongman. The fact Time doesn't seem to understand this or isn't willing to say so is what puzzles me.
LOL, oh no, they understand. They are just mad because POTY is seen as something you win and bad people don't win.
While the verdict may be in as far as you're concerned, and while I would largely agree, I would also point out that the "verdict is in" on George W. Bush. He's the worst president in the history of the Republic. But "history" may yet "vindicate" him. And there are a lot of people that believe that. Just like there are a lot of leftists still holding out for Chavez. I faltered when he started lifting broadcast licenses, but then Columbia Journalism acknowledged the potential validity of the maneuver. It was easy enough to give a break there. But come on ... the only thing saving Chavez right now is that he was rejected in his latest power grab; he's not doing anything to save his reputation. And much like Bush or Chavez, the world can still go so far astray as to make these men seem somehow correct. And there are a lot of people working to redeem Bush's behavior. Whether or not we appreciate the standard, there it is. If Japan had the same kind of PR machine working for it that the U.S. has, Bush's behavior since 9/11 would have redeemed the Emperor for attacking Pearl Harbor. If Bush and his successors behave badly enough, who knows? History may eventually vindicate Osama bin Laden. And while there is some merit to waiting for history to play out, some things are perfectly obvious. Bin Laden picked the wrong fight, Chavez is too stupid to realize that the Revolution cannot be top-down, the only real question about Bush is how stupid he actually is, and Putin is a thug. It's not quite the same as saying, "Maybe this Hitler chap will buck up the German economy and stabilize Europe", but Putin will not be saved by an inscrutable body count.
It would be nice if Time actually stuck to the original definition. Otherwise no, POTY has no effect on my life.... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!