Time’s Person of the Year: A Dictator
by Mark Noonan on December 19th, 2007 at 08:29am
Given a choice between a successful general, a beloved author, a former vice President and a tyrant, Time naturally went with the tyrant:
He stands, above all, for stability—stability before freedom, stability before choice, stability in a country that has hardly seen it for a hundred years.
Err, umm…Russia has seen lots of stability over the past 100 years…the stability of the grave, courtesy of Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, Brezhnev…and now their bloody-handed successor, Putin. What in heck is the lure of “stability” for the pinheads of the media elite? Something frozen is stable, something chained is stable…something dead is stable. That which is living and striving and free - that is unstable; and God bless it.
For Time, it is enough that Putin has put Russia back on the map - what map is that? What is really clear, from their article, is that the editors of Time miss the Cold War:
Throughout much of the 20th century, the Soviet Union cast an ominous shadow over the world. It was the U.S.’s dark twin. But after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Russia receded from the American consciousness as we became mired in our own polarized politics. And it lost its place in the great game of geopolitics, its significance dwarfed not just by the U.S. but also by the rising giants of China and India. That view was always naive. Russia is central to our world—and the new world that is being born.
Ah, the good, old days - when America was held in check by a superpower capable of restraining us from…bringing democracy to the world.
Sick, sick, sick…Time needs to close it doors, it has entirely dishonored itself.
Click here to create an account on Blogs For Victory and post comments!
December 19th, 2007 at 8:40 am
Gore gored again! (I thought Al was a shoe-in.)
I’m sure Al and the Algorians are devastated! Will they demand a recount?
AAR
December 19th, 2007 at 8:46 am
There must be some hanging chads somewhere. Or would that be “hanging Olafs”?
The entire MSM have become a joke. Their bias is prevalent in every single report. How did these morons graduate from journalism school? Do they no longer teach objectivity?
December 19th, 2007 at 9:33 am
[...] Original post by Mark Noonan [...]
December 19th, 2007 at 10:25 am
Для Лучшего Или Для Плохого
TIME Magazine had a choice for Person of the Year between Al Gore, JK Rowling, Vladimir Vladimirovitch, Hu JIntao, and General David Petraeus. Guess who they chose. Да, Comrades! But this is not entirely surprising:TIME's Person of the…
December 19th, 2007 at 10:38 am
Mark, what, you Republicans were hoping Bush would be selected? As if!!
December 19th, 2007 at 10:55 am
Time’s Person of the Year: A dumbazz Dictator & war-criminal-in-chief called G W Bush.
Your devine idiot & criminal should be prosecuted for mass-murder.
December 19th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Back in 2004, an aide to Bush said that liberals “live in the reality based community. That’s not the way the world works anymore.”
This post is a perfect example of that philosophy in action. Time’s PotY has always been about who was the most influential, not the best, most heroic or nicest. In the article, Time says clearly “At its best, it is a clear-eyed recognition of the world as it is and of the most powerful individuals and forces shaping that world?for better or for worse.”
Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich were named. So was the American soldier. So were Joe Stalin (twice) and Ayatollah Khomeini. It’s never been about who did good things, but who was most influential.
But that really doesn’t matter to today’s conservatives. By recognizing the reality of Putin’s influence, Time has disgraced itself. As long as we all live in fantasyland, everything will be fine.
That post is just pathetic. It really is.
December 19th, 2007 at 11:22 am
“TIME’s Person of the Year is not and never has been an honor. It is not an endorsement. It is not a popularity contest. At its best, it is a clear-eyed recognition of the world as it is and of the most powerful individuals and forces shaping that world—for better or for worse.”
Time’s statement regarding their pick of person of the year. Do you think you guys can get a grip on that?
I do remember a statement by Bush stating something like he had “looked into Putin’s eyes and saw his soul” ?? Whatever the heck that means. Could it be that the president can’t learn much about a person just by looking into their eyes?
And Neocon, you are a great one to talk about “objectivity”. Look up the word in the dictionary. See if you can comprehend exactly what it means.
December 19th, 2007 at 11:28 am
first bush, now putin… what’s with the fetish for tyrannical dictators?
December 19th, 2007 at 11:33 am
Really, how short is the memories of the former B4Bers?
If you are attempting to criticize Time for making the choice of Putin as the most influential individual of the year; which in no way (at least to rational thinkers) is an endorsement or validation of his being a positive influence, then where is/was the criticism of Bush for actually allying himself with him and explicitly stating that Putin is a good person?
I won’t hold my breath.
December 19th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Mark has a problem in being fair and forthright in his posts. He likes t take things out of context to suit his purposes. Instead of reading the Time piece and taking it for what it is - an assessment of a leader of a very influential country, he wants to make Time a “liberal” machine that hates freedom, Christianity, the American Way, our troops - you name it, Time hates anything good and pure in America that Mark believes in.
Wasn’t it just last summer that President Bush invited Putin to Kennebunkport to spend time with Bush 1 and all of the Bush family? Explain that Mark - what the hell am I missing here? You are such a staunch supporter of Bush, so how do you explain the history between these two men?
December 19th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
Mark says:
“Ah, the good, old days - when America was held in check by a superpower capable of restraining us from…bringing democracy to the world.”
Mark’s lackey sez:
Looks like we ’bout to finish-up democracy spreadin’ in Iraq Mr. Mark where we be off to next?
An another thing Mr. Mark, we be running mighty low on time, troops, and money, and we have a whole heap of democracy spreadin’ to do in the world.
Lordy Mr. Mark we in a pre-dic-a-ment fo’ sho’. Grandpappy always said that a democracy spreader’s work is never done. Ain’t that the true Mr. Mark.
December 19th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
I actually have to agree with Sunny on the first post…it’s not a popularity contest and you need to realize that, Mark. This is no reason to lose your mind. Personally, I disagree with the choice, but not because he’s a dictator, but because he didn’t have the biggest impact in the world this year. I’ll cover that over on my own blog in a moment, but the Person of the Year isn’t supposed to be the one they like the most. That’s the Nobel Prize. :)
December 19th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
its a pretty far fetched ideology to sum up the man of the year as a conniving ex KGB officer who has used his peoples weath and government to insure that any challenge to his rule is either killed or jailed
what is wrong with Time? the kid who saved his own live by playing dead, a trick he learned on World of WarCraft on the internet, deserves this title more than this corrupt politician does
one must consider the value of such dignified appointments before endorsing them, as I am sure Kasparov would
press like this is nothing more than ignorance
December 19th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
[...] Person of the Year as Vladimir Putin of Russia. Over at Blogs for Victory, Mark Noonan is losing his everloving mind because Putin is pretty much becoming a dictator. Apparently, Mark doesn’t realize that the [...]
December 19th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Ah, the good, old days - when America was held in check by a superpower capable of restraining us from…bringing democracy to the world.
Egad, you just gotta love Blogs for Victory!
You make me so proud to be…to be…an Amerikan.
Thank goodness God loves the USA more.
December 19th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
js, did you bother to even read the Time piece? Doubtful - just some inane bather without getting all of the facts. The person of the year is not about who has achieved the most towards world peace, or who found the cure for some horrible disease, but it is about the influence a person has on the entire planet. Not just the US. Do yourself a favor - read the article, then comment.
December 19th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
Once again we see that BDS is an epidemic of the left.
No topic can be posted without leftist moonbats demonstrating there obssessive compulsive disorder by use the post, no matter how unrelated, to bash the President.
December 19th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Sunny,
Did you ever figure out that to be a hero, you really should do something heroic?
A title like “Man of the Year” should despict someone of honor, not a thief, a liar, or a murderer, but someone whose deeds are truely worthy of emulating.
That means that our kids should grow up wanting to be something better than mafia don’s or suicide killers….they should strive to advance moral and good conduct instead of emulate the deeds of Putin.
Or do you think that Time sets the moral code, and we all should fall in line because with what they say…
Think about it with something more than a physical grunt, ok?
December 19th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Who cares about the would-be dictator of a has-been country when you’ve got news like this
I mean, come on, where are Time’s priorities?
December 19th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Person of the Year is morally neutral, js… Stop being an idiot. In fact, if you read the actual article, you would know that the article is highly critical of ole Vlad…
You should familiarize yourself with Spook’s “First Rule of Holes”.
December 19th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Retired Spook,
Lynne Spears is a typical Red State Grandmom
spitting out them little neocon young’uns and grand young’uns. Why did they take her book deal away?
December 19th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
js “Did you ever figure out that to be a hero, you really should do something heroic?”
You really do have a problem with comprehension. Just because Time has a Man of the Year does in no way indicate that the “man” must be a hero. I believe in past years they have picked - oh Heavens no - a woman. There have been years when they have picked an object. In fact last Time has a “Person of the Year: You”. You are a dope. Sorry - you just need to be a little more open with your thought process and try to recognize what the “Person of the Year” or “Man of the Year’ is all about. It is not necessarily about heros.
December 19th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
phnx,
The Nobel Peace Prize and Time’s “Man, Person, or Thing of the Year” no longer have any real meaning.
As we have seen, even terrorists and dictators make the list!
AAR
December 19th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
And lately God’s Creation and the United States Constitution have no meaning either if you are a conservative.
December 19th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
SteaM,
1. Worship the CREATOR not the CREATION
2. By your comments on the Constitution I take it that you support strict constructionist judges. Finally you show some degree of intelligence.
December 19th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
I was pretty off topic with that comment.
My bad.
December 19th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Geesh, you lefties are entirely clueless. Did any of you read what I wrote? I re-read it to make certain I was writing in English, and I was…so what in heck is your excuse for making the comments you’ve made?
I’ll make it real simple for you - who really had the most impact on the world in 2007? Putin? By doing what? Rigging an election in Russia to perpetuate his rule? Being intransigent on the world stage? Hugo Chavez has done that much…and if you can’t see the pure idiocy in an article which says that Putin has brought stabiltiy to a Russia which saw little stability in the past 100 years, then you’re (I’m sorry) just a moron.
December 19th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Mark you should be giddy with this choice. Who else besides Putin in this past year or so was willing to suspend habeas corpus, wiretap its citizens without a warrant, give up its spies to get rid of truth seekers, have its top spy agency destroy evidence, stock the court system with cronies with the sole purpose of getting rid of political enemies, ignore treaties such as the Geneva conventions for the purpose of torture, and hold persons in prisons indefinitely without charges?
Mark I know you know who it is, but just in case I will give you another hint, Republican candidate for President Mike Huckabee said this week,…he has an arrogant bunker mentality..
December 19th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
We would have to say that you Mark, are the moron not to mention a pretencious… well you know. Name one leader in Russia/USSR in the last hundred years that has brought more stability to the country than Putin. Putin is a powermongering fiend who will do at nothing to ensure that he retains power even when he is not president - but he did revive the Russian economy and brought it out of the dark ages that it collapsed into after the fall of the Soviet Union. Just because you don’t approve of him doesn’t mean you can rewrite history to discount him. I’m pretty sure that there was more than one person they could have used that all had an equal effect on the world but I’m pretty sure Time’s qualifiers for their decision are far more well rounded, objective, and educated than yours. Stop getting so bent out of shape over the not so important things in life.
December 19th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
plainjane makes an excellent point by the way.
December 19th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Canuckguy - seeing how Bush has de-armed THREE hostile countries nuclear programs and is cutting our arsenal by a huge degree, well yah. He would have been a good choice.
December 19th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
Mark-
I know you wanted Petreaus, and he is solid choice. But Putin is a solid choice as well. He has been incredibly consequential this year, he stood up to America trying to put a missile shield on his door step, kind of reigniting the cold war, he just shipped nuclear fuel to Iran, he has a 70% approval rating in his own country and russian nationalsim is on the rise and anything that is done in the world must take into account how Putin will react. As my hero Stephen Colbert would say. Putin ‘08!
December 19th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
“plainjane makes an excellent point by the way.”
Maybe to a moron!
You lefties need to re-read the article, otherwise those that have read it will put you in the same nutty category with Aaron and Dumbassjane AKA”The Cow”
December 19th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Navydad, blanket assumptions (like the ones that you make) are the definition of the not so intelligent word you joined to Janes name. Is she such because she lied or because she made it very clear to you that Putin and your hero/role model have a lot in common. And just because people happen to think freely, speak out, and don’t cut and paste from your sleezy neocon rhetoric handbook doesn’t mean they are all “lefties” as you not so eloquently put it. And why ask someone to re-read a blog post (not considered an article) from someone who did not read the article they are blogging about. All Mark did was post a knee jerk reaction to the term “Man of the Year” and “Putin” in the same sentence. If such an objection exists then I object to Times “Person of the Year” last year which was “You” because it would included people such as yourself.
December 20th, 2007 at 12:40 am
Gene,
How on earth would you know what Putin’s approval rating is? Its not like there’s a free press to conduct and honestly report a poll in Russia…the only inside knowledge I have is second-hand; seems that a Russian found out that rather large amounts of cash were spread around the Russian electorate just before the recent vote was taken.
Putin is the second-rate leader of a second rank power rapidly declining towards third rank (ie, on par with Germany and Japan). He governs by corruption and brutality and he’s only kept afloat right now due to record high oil prices. And Russia is only admitted to the councils of the Great Powers due to its large nuclear arsenal…take that away, and people would pay far more attention to what Italy has to say than what Russia thinks.
I’ve thought about this through the day - and the man who has had the largest impact on the world in 2007 is President Bush…love him or hate him, he’s gotten what he wanted both at home and abroad all through 2007, and he’s done it from a greatly weakened political position.
December 20th, 2007 at 12:53 am
Mark,
You may be right, but, in any case, being named Time Magazine’s Person of the Year and 50 cents will definitely get you a Diet Coke from the vending machine in the break rooms at the Richardson Police Department.