|
|
#31
12-10-2006, 01:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Time Magazine Person of the Year Speculation
[ QUOTE ]
What about Stephen Colbert? Possibly Colbert and Stewart as Co-Persons. [/ QUOTE ] Not a chance. [ QUOTE ] If they wanted to be honest about Democratic gains, then it should be Howard Dean. It might have been Ned Lamont if he had won. [/ QUOTE ] Dean might happen, but the vote was much more Anti-Republcan than pro-Democrat. All Dean had to do was snd out candidates. This is why I predict Rummy. [ QUOTE ] I could see a case for them going with Benedict XVI if they wanted to write more religion articles. [/ QUOTE ] Won't happen. 
|
|
#32
12-10-2006, 03:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time Magazine Person of the Year Speculation
[ QUOTE ]
What about Stephen Colbert? Possibly Colbert and Stewart as Co-Persons. [/ QUOTE ] That would be awesome. Colbert > any other news and it's not close.
|
|
#33
12-10-2006, 06:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time Magazine Person of the Year Speculation
Cant be Colbert, he doens't work for Time Warner.
Cant be Dean, the establishment fears his straight shooting style. That poll is so indoctrinating: "These are the pre-approved people who matter". Mick Foley used to do really well when you could vote for whoever you wanted. I hope they pick Hugo or Armadillyjad so the blind right can howl about patriotism.
|
|
#34
12-11-2006, 12:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time Magazine Person of the Year Speculation
[ QUOTE ]
I think Time has gotten too PC to pick evil people. Osama clearly should have won in 2001 but they picked Guliani instead. If they picked someone evil you'd h ave every blowhard on Fox News up in arms about how they are supporting terror by naming them Person of the Year. [/ QUOTE ] Bingo. This is exactly why this award blows. Time claims that it is for the most influential person good or bad, but the reality is that they usually go with a safe choice to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy about themselves.
|
|
#35
12-16-2006, 09:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time Magazine Person of the Year Speculation
[ QUOTE ]
I heard a dirty rumor, and I think your initial fears might be right. I know a journalist who gets various industry publications thrown his way. Apparently, Time is strongly considering making it "You". PUKE. [/ QUOTE ] Well, it's true. The person(s) of the year is [us]. *vomit*
|
|
#37
12-16-2006, 11:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time Magazine Person of the Year Speculation
Sheesh, that means I've now been Person of the Year twice!
|
|
#39
12-17-2006, 03:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time Magazine Person of the Year Speculation
"And Stengel said if the magazine had decided to go with an individual, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the likely choice. "It just felt to me a little off selecting him," Stengel said."
Off = Not warm and fuzzy inside.
|
|
#40
12-17-2006, 04:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time Magazine Person of the Year Speculation
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think Time has gotten too PC to pick evil people. Osama clearly should have won in 2001 but they picked Guliani instead. If they picked someone evil you'd h ave every blowhard on Fox News up in arms about how they are supporting terror by naming them Person of the Year. [/ QUOTE ] Bingo. This is exactly why this award blows. Time claims that it is for the most influential person good or bad, but the reality is that they usually go with a safe choice to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy about themselves. [/ QUOTE ] If it was really "most influential" it would just go to the current sitting president every year. :P
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
