SpongBob Squarepants.
Jon Stewart?
running away from all these people who actually know politics and current events and stuff
Considering that Time’s “X of the Year” award is supposed to recognize the one person/trend/thing/whatever that has had the most influence on the news in the past year, I think the answer is obvious:
Country of the Year: Iraq
Scott Petersen - would go well with the general info-tainment theme these days, even though he is absolutely irrelevant.
Howard Dean - best battlecry in recent history.
“Protection of Marriage” Amendment - biggest success through failure.
Kim Jong Il - Most Ignored Dictator
Actually, I can see Jon Stewart as a dark horse candidate. The Daily Show has been incredibly successful this year and is becoming viewed as a political and journalistic force. He’s been on loads of magazine covers, had loads of interviews, and smacked around the two nitwits on Crossfire.
Could be…
How do non extremist conservatives view Jon Stewart ? Somehow I feel they don’t think too badly of him. He seems more palatable to them ? Or its just a false impression ?
I think Jon Stewart might be a “light” but fun Person of the Year… a good chance to avoid major flak if they chose controversially.
Before everyone here gets too hyped up on Jon Stewart; yes, he’s funny and articulate in taking other people down. He attacks what 99.5% of the population sees as ridiculous so you always agree with him and you always think he’s on your side.
What if he comes out and actually takes stances on stuff?
Pro-choice.
Pro-same sex marriage.
Reversing the Bush tax cuts.
Now he’s just another politician.
I’m going either for Burt Rutan (feel good), Iraqi insurgent (probably really the best, but a bad-guy), or Chineese/Indian entrepeneur (probably the biggest long term impact).
I wouldn’t say it’s a failure yet, it’s on the agenda for the next term. They haven’t even proposed it to Congress yet.
Stewart’s not going to take a specific stance on the issues. He knows he’s a comedian and often says (on Crossfire and elsewhere) that his main goal has always been being funny.
But that’d still make him smarter than 98% of the ones we’ve got already, especially the one in the Oval Office. Where’s the drawback?
Not getting all hyped up, I just think that you could make a case for him. If the race gets too close or the choices don’t seem to be wowing anyone. He could make a light but acceptable choice.
And here we have the perfect example of why I can’t stand “politics.” The process insists on distilling complex, intelligent human beings into 10 word sound bites. Ugh. He’s not a politician, he’s a person! And a comedian, at that!
And you could distill me down into the same 9 words you chose for Stewart - yet I don’t agree with him all the time! Hmm, somehow that should read: all the time, many times, some nights more often than not, I don’t agree with him. Yet we have those 9 words in common. Which renders those 9 words essentially useless, doesn’t it?
For what it’s worth, I was semi-joking when I made the suggestion. Only semi. I do think he’s a “safe” choice, which would be understandable in the “unsafe” climate we’re currently in. I also don’t seriously think he’s the most influential person on the planet this year, which is what the choice is supposed to be about. The problem is, it seems like noone’s been a really positive influence on the planet this year, so our only choices are negative ones. I just don’t want to deal with more negativity. I’m going to go cry under the covers now and wait for something good to happen.
I have no problem with it being John Stewart for two reasons. First, despite being a comedian, he makes people think. Thinking is good. The second reason is economic. Time is going to choose someone who is likely to alienate 51% (or48%) of its readership. Time readers normally have at least three brain cells to rub together, so no-one should be upset enough to cancel a subscription.
The really safe choice, however, is Lance Armstrong or someone totally apolitical.
I love Jon Stewart, but there is no way he could be considered Time’s Thingamadoochie of the Year. The criteria is something like “the person or whatever that has had the greatest influence on our lives”. Jon Stewart is - as he is so fond of saying - on basic cable. What percentage of the country ever sees him? How much influence can he possibly have? And despite his eye popping performance on Crossfire, are the *Crossfire * twits screaming any less?
I can see Stewart as an honerable mention, but not the main guy.
I’m sticking to either Rove/Bush or the Red States/undecided voter. This election and the political drift that it underscored was huge in so many ways. Even a disastrous war in Iraq didn’t knock the Red State mentality off kilter.
As for the “light choices”, John Stewart, Lance Armstrong, etc. Looking through the list of past entries I don’t see anyone I recognize as a sports figure or entertainers. While they have some strange choices (planet of the year), I think they do try keep away from the purely pop-culture folks.
The person they choose will be because of the US election. Outside of Iraq, it was the dominent story this year.
I would nominate the “beheaded hostages.” And I’d hope for a tasteful cover.
I don’t see how it could be anyone besides Bush. I suspect that more people have strong feelings about Bush then just about any other person mentioned in this thread. Lance Armstrong? Jon Stewart? Please, neither one of them has had a negligable impact on our lives this past year. Menewhile people throughout the world are hanging on the words of G.W. Bush.
I’m not saying Bush is a great guy I’m just saying he seems to be the prime candidate for Person of the Year.
Marc
That’s precisely why I think it’s going to be Rove, Rice, or someone in the Bush camp. They’re the ones who got the man elected. Certainly, he didn’t do it himself.
al-Zarqawi has emerged as the most dangerous and cunning foe that America has faced in years. He is the modern Saladin.
They didn’t give it to Bin Laden the year of the 9/11 attacks, so the sure as hell won’t give it to some second fiddle like al-Zarqawi.
Jon Stewart was on the cover of Newsweek’s end of year cover two years back, which makes me suspect that Time won’t choose him since they don’t want to look like they’re copying someone else’s idea.