(12-20-2012, 12:34 AM)Tammy75 Wrote: I suppose I am the town idiot but what exactly has Obama did that makes ppl hate him so much?

Some people hate him (and some didn't even give him a chance) and I'm sure they'll chime in. I don't hate him but I also don't think he deserves Man of the Year.

(12-20-2012, 12:34 AM)Tammy75 Wrote: I suppose I am the town idiot but what exactly has Obama did that makes ppl hate him so much?

I don't hate him, I don't hate anyone, I just don't think he is the biggest news maker of the past year.

(12-20-2012, 12:34 AM)Tammy75 Wrote: I suppose I am the town idiot but what exactly has Obama did that makes ppl hate him so much?

Just because PEOPLE didn't name him the sexiest man of the year and put him on their cover, I don't think they hate him.

BTW - Friends of mine (at an unnamed publishing house) confided that Obama was to be Hombre de Ano ONLY for the Spanish version of TIME.

The Ebonics version, too.

Johnny Football was to adorn the cover of the US English version.

(12-20-2012, 06:29 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Johnny Football was to adorn the cover of the US English version.

Johnny Man-drizzle!

Fo-Shizzle!

Leave it to a true freshman to be the only one in the last two years to beat Alabama.

Colin Klein (senior) should have won it!!!! Johnny wonny what's his name!
Tammy 75, some people hate our President because he is not white IMO.

(12-20-2012, 06:53 PM)blueberryhill Wrote: Tammy 75, some people hate our President because he is not white IMO.

Ahem . . . He's half white.

Some hate him because he's not ALL black.

Or Mexican.

Or a woman.

Or a US citizen.

Tiki, or because he is Muslim!

All I know is he looks pretty damn black to me. Shouldn't it be half Caucasian? Black/white makes me think of a panda bear.

(12-20-2012, 07:29 PM)username Wrote: Shouldn't it be half Caucasian?

Only if the other half is labled Negro.

If you use African in any type of racial description, you'll only ignite and add fuel to the birther's argument.

Morgan Freeman doesn't consider him our first Black president.

And he's a REAL Negro!

Mulatto was so much easier to describe the offspring of desperate white women.

(12-20-2012, 07:38 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:

(12-20-2012, 07:29 PM)username Wrote: Shouldn't it be half Caucasian?

Only if the other half is labled Negro.

If you use African in any type of racial description, you'll only ignite and add fuel to the birther's argument.

Morgan Freeman doesn't consider him our first Black president.

And he's a REAL Negro!

Mulatto was so much easier to describe the offspring of desperate white women.

Huh.

If you combine a brown (Hispanic) guy with a white woman what do you get besides a litter?



Lots of browns out there too. We should all be named after a Crayola crayon. Desert Tan. Dark Chocolate. Barely Beige.

(12-20-2012, 07:52 PM)username Wrote: If you combine a brown (Hispanic) guy with a white woman what do you get besides a litter?

Oh fuck!

2013 PERSON OF THE YEAR...



Time's managing editor Nancy Gibbs explained the magazine's choice on Wednesday, calling the Pope "a new voice of conscience."

"In his nine months in office, he has placed himself at the very center of the central conversations of our time, about wealth and poverty, fairness and justice, transparency, modernity, globalization, the role of women, the nature of marriage, the temptations of power," she said. "When he kisses the face of a disfigured man or washes the feet of a Muslim woman, the image resonates far beyond the boundaries of the Catholic Church."

And the runners-up:

1. Edward Snowden (NSA Leaker)
2. Edith Windsor (gay marriage pioneer)
3. Bashar Al-Assad (Syrian President)
4. Ted Cruz (Senator)

With Time magazines record I thought they might have preferred to make the nazi pope their man of the year when he was pontiff, if its good enough for uncle adolf....

They've come close though was Assad, they must have liked the way he used chemical weapons on civilians.

And Snowden? They must have withdrawn him directly out of donny douchebags personal wankbank. He's currently whispering American intelligence secrets like sweet nothings into Putins ear, what a fucking hero!

TIME's criteria isn't meant to be "the best or most admirable person of the year". It's defined as the person who made the biggest mark on the world and/or history - in their opinions - good, bad, or open to interpretation.

I don't think anybody in the West thought Ayatollah Khomeini (Man of the Year in 1979) was a great guy, for example. But, it was undeniable that he'd made a mark on history and international relations that year; he was all over the global media - mostly in a negative light here in the US.

TIME caught a ton of shit for giving Khomeini the title though, so they seem to stick with playing it safe.

I remember reading in 2001 that Osama Bin Laden was the top contender according to the criteria. He certainly made a huge mark on the world. But, it would have offended people who only want to think of good guys as having incredible influence and affecting history (so they gave it to NYC Mayor Rudy Guliiani instead).

Awesome choice. This Pope, as far as I can tell, is everything one would hope our Pope to be.

I had a patient who said to me she had pulled the other Pope aside and asked him to step down.

(12-11-2013, 03:13 PM)Duchess Wrote:

Awesome choice. This Pope, as far as I can tell, is everything one would hope our Pope to be.

He ain't my pope, all he is to me is the latest spokesman for Santa Claus.

(12-11-2013, 03:05 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: TIME's criteria isn't meant to be "the best or most admirable person of the year". It's defined as the person who made the biggest mark on the world and/or history - in their opinions - good, bad, or open to interpretation.

I don't think anybody in the West thought Ayatollah Khomeini (Man of the Year in 1979) was a great guy, for example. But, it was undeniable that he'd made a mark on history and international relations that year; he was all over the global media - mostly in a negative light here in the US.

TIME caught a ton of shit for giving Khomeini the title though, so they seem to stick with playing it safe.

I remember reading in 2001 that Osama Bin Laden was the top contender according to the criteria. He certainly made a huge mark on the world. But, it would have offended people who only want to think of good guys as having incredible influence and affecting history (so they gave it to NYC Mayor Rudy Guliiani instead).

“Man of the year” sounds awfully like an endorsement to me.

(12-12-2013, 01:24 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: “Man of the year” sounds awfully like an endorsement to me.

I agree, by association, it does.

Their choices rarely match the official documented criteria anyway, IMO.

They changed the title from "man of the year" to "person of the year" several years ago, but have yet to deem a woman (who wasn't part of a group) as the person of the year. I remember a couple of issues where it wasn't even a person, but instead an object or ideology that was awarded the title.

My dad was a TIME subscriber - I read a lot of their issues cover-to-cover growing up, but not much since then. I like the "Person of the Year" issue though, mostly because it motivates me to think back on the year and who really made a huge global impact.

(12-12-2013, 01:22 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: He ain't my pope, all he is to me is the latest spokesman for Santa Claus.

When I posted "our" I was referring to the Catholic community.