TIME People of the year

[dreamongypsydkm]

I'll come out of hiding to post about this... It's a victory for Bono, DATA, The One Campaign, and the work of Bill and Melinda Gates.



http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...140301,00.html

[David]

Time never puts people with annual incomes of $70,000 or less on its cover for Person Of The Year, lauding that person for humanitarianism & philanthropy.

[dissention]

What a shocker.

Why not just simply laud "good samaritans" in general instead of blowing more smoke up the collective asses of celebrities, especially after Hurricane Katrina? Probably because it wouldn't sell the **** magazine.

And poor Bono. The man just can't seem to comprehend the extent to which he's being used by politicians. I read his recent Rolling Stone interview and honestly felt bad for the man by the time I finished it. There's no doubt that he's sincere, but he's so naive.

[Rickypt]

Originally Posted by dissention

What a shocker.

Why not just simply laud "good samaritans" in general instead of blowing more smoke up the collective asses of celebrities, especially after Hurricane Katrina? Probably because it wouldn't sell the **** magazine.

Agreed, there were so many amazing stories of volunteerism and philanthrophy after Katrina.

But you're right, Time needs to sell its magazines, and if this "award" helps draw more attention to global AIDS, then I'd rather it be those 3 than some of the turds that were rumored (like Rice).

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

But you're right, Time needs to sell its magazines, and if this "award" helps draw more attention to global AIDS, then I'd rather it be those 3 than some of the turds that were rumored (like Rice).

I'd rather see a Bono toenail clipping receive the "honor" than Minute Rice.

[dreamongypsydkm]

Originally Posted by dissention

What a shocker.

Why not just simply laud "good samaritans" in general instead of blowing more smoke up the collective asses of celebrities, especially after Hurricane Katrina? Probably because it wouldn't sell the **** magazine.

And poor Bono. The man just can't seem to comprehend the extent to which he's being used by politicians. I read his recent Rolling Stone interview and honestly felt bad for the man by the time I finished it. There's no doubt that he's sincere, but he's so naive.

I think you need to re-read it, because you're the one who sounds naive...and a bit ignorant at that.

[irishgrl]

Thank GAWD it isnt Bush or Osama...sometimes I wonder what criteria that magazine uses? At least the current honorees are humanitarians....

that comment about 70k a year being a requisite for front cover status...
I have mixed feelings about that idea....on the one hand I agree, they should elevate a "regular joe" who has done amazing things (why not Cindy Sheehan? Rosa Parks?) but in the case of humanitarianism, it takes mega bucks to even be able to DO good works.....thus the fact that the Gates and Bono are pictured makes sense in that regard.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by dreamongypsydkm

I think you need to re-read it, because you're the one who sounds naive...and a bit ignorant at that.

Hey, whatever you say. Bono's the ignorant one. I doubt he even read the debt relief package that was announced in June before he jumped atop his high horse and proclaimed it a piece of history or some such **** along those lines. The next time he sits down for an interview, I'd love to see the interviewer ask him to explain the conditions for debt relief in detail. Maybe he'll be able to spin them as much as he spun the issue of Bush shoving abstinence down the throats of foreign countries in order to get relief in that awful Rolling Stone interview. His flat-out denial of the interviewer's comments in regard to Uganda was absurd. He also failed to make mention of the fact that Bush formed an alliance with Iraq and Iran in 2002 at the United Nations Special Session for Children that completely expunged any mention of the right to sex education and services. He failed to make mention of the fact that Cambodia was prevented by policies imposed by the US from using US aid dollars to purchase condoms. If he wants to get Bush and these other politicians to pony up the money, that's great, but don't be a ****ing apologist and kiss-ass in your attempts to do so. Don't whitewash all the things they're doing. But I suppose he's great PR for the politicians because he either doesn't know what he's talking about or he's too chicken **** to actually speak up on the issues that really matter. In the end, Bono as arbiter is not my cup of tea and never will be.

[Rickypt]

Thing that has bugged me about Bono is that he gets access to our president and doesn't talk about the AIDS crisis in the U.S. as well as global. While it is nothing like Africa and other areas, there are people here without access to treatment, and who are living in poverty dealing with a host of issues in addition to HIV.

I guess I don't get why a dude from Ireland gets the ear of someone who isn't even his president. Since he does, he should understand the enormous responsibility associated with that and should have delivered a much more comprehensive message about the AIDS epidemic.

I've never liked Bono. Don't like his pretentious music, his stupid sunglasses, and his pseudo-activism like having people send text messages during his shows. I'm curious how much money he actually donates to his causes.

The Gates are doing tremendous work through their Foundation (although I wish they would focus some of it domestically). Perhaps this recognition from Time will help raise the bar about what is expected from rich people to make a difference. Hopefully that David Brooks guy will have a read.

[cliffdweller]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

I've never liked Bono. Don't like his pretentious music, his stupid sunglasses,

Message to Bono: Take the stupid sunglasses off before you sit down with important world leaders. You look like a silly f*cktard with those glasses on. Take 'em off, please, please, for the love of all that's holy. Take. Them. Off. Thanks. --T

[wondergirl9847]

I think the Ledgies deserved to be People of the Year for 2003-2004 for donating tons of money to the Fleetwood Mac SYW Tour Fund.

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

I've never liked Bono. Don't like his pretentious music, his stupid sunglasses, and his pseudo-activism like having people send text messages during his shows.

I agree 100%. He has been SOOOOOOO overexposed this year. They're talking about him right now on CNN(as I now change the channel).
And take off those stupid f*cking sunglasses!!!! You look like an idiot!

[David]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Thank GAWD it isnt Bush or Osama...sometimes I wonder what criteria that magazine uses? At least the current honorees are humanitarians....

that comment about 70k a year being a requisite for front cover status...

I essentially said that Time never puts middle-class-level humanitarians & philanthropists -- Joe Nobodys -- on the cover. Instead, it's always an extremely wealthy person, typically an entertainer or an entrepreneur. However, I don't know the roster of recipients well. I think Mother Teresa was named Person Of The Year awhile back.

I have mixed feelings about that idea....on the one hand I agree, they should elevate a "regular joe" who has done amazing things (why not Cindy Sheehan? Rosa Parks?) but in the case of humanitarianism, it takes mega bucks to even be able to DO good works.....thus the fact that the Gates and Bono are pictured makes sense in that regard.

That was essentially my point, except in one regard: In order to give away millions of dollars, you have to have millions of dollars. But in principle, giving away millions if you have millions more isn't any more noble or worthy of singling out than a Joe or Jane Nobody giving away thousands (if all they have is thousands to begin with).

I think Time should consider who give less because they have less -- but who nevertheless give mightily of their time & money -- for Person Of The Year. Of course, then all the Bono & U2 fans wouldn't rush out to buy the stupid magazine.

Time hasn't been worth my following it since it named Jacques Barzun Intellectual Of The Year back in 1950 or so. That was the magazine's high point.

[David]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

I agree 100%. He has been SOOOOOOO overexposed this year. They're talking about him right now on CNN(as I now change the channel).
And take off those stupid f*cking sunglasses!!!! You look like an idiot!

I like U2 & Bono, but he's certainly a pat-myself-on-the-back type of guy. I'm listening to the Chicago show from the Vertigo Tour, & he sounds alternately tired & inspired. The band -- the Edge, Mullen -- is roaring however!

But even U2 is partly infected with the Too Much Hardware Onstage Virus. However, unlike with Fleetwood Mac, you can still get a solid whomping sense of the presence of the musicians in the band, & not the hired ranch hands surrounding them. They probably tell those guys to drop waaay back.

[David]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

I guess I don't get why a dude from Ireland gets the ear of someone who isn't even his president. Since he does, he should understand the enormous responsibility associated with that and should have delivered a much more comprehensive message about the AIDS epidemic.

What good would it do? With Shrub, isn't it in one ear & out the other, with not even a pit stop?

Perhaps this recognition from Time will help raise the bar about what is expected from rich people to make a difference.

I don't expect it from rich people. I do, however, appreciate it.