Time's Person of the Year
 

The end of the year brings speculation as to whom Time will pick as it's Person of the Year, although I remember with a nostalgic tear with it was Man of the Year. Often it's very difficult to guess, but I can't think of a year when it's been easier. The part I like about the process is that every year, Time has to explain patiently that the nominee is the person who, for better or worse, has done more to influence the news. Still, that will do nothing to dispel the inevitable criticisms that the selection of Barack Obama is further evidence of the librull media.

Runners up may include Paulson, Bernanke and MikeWaters, but I can't imagine anyone coming close to the President-elect.

I agree that BO will likely make the final cut. However, ever since Time picked the computer as its "person" of the year, you now have to consider inanimate objects, as well. I could also see a nod to "The Economy" as "person" of the year.

One true factoid....on my resume, under personal, I have listed "Time Magazine's Person of the Year - 2006." I havent looked for a job yet, but if I do, I hope someone asks me about it.

http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine...061225_400.jpg

They'll all ejaculate in unison over his name.

I will cease to watch news, except for financial news. Or really important stuff, such as sports, why Nick isn't the one, and who won Dancing with the Stars.

I love Person of the Year because the U.S. always kicks ass in that event.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Pe...ns_of_the_Year

Hey, you already sound like an Obama suppporter. It's nice to see you coming around.

I had it listed on my law school resume that I was person of the year, but I was advised to leave it off. Killjoys.

leave it off? what for? did mikewaters review your resume? If so, keep in mind that there are no interviews for law school admission.

The personal section is completely ridiculous anyway. Do employers really care that you like to read books and play basketball?

I remember when Wheel of Fortune finally changed its format for the Bonus Round....given that everyone always picked the same exact letters every game, the producers decided to just spot everyone those same letters and allow them to choose a few extra ones. Now, everyone gets R, S, T, N, L, and E.

I think personal interests are the same....everyone puts the exact same ones....ski, travel, sports, movies, books......yawn. Why not spice it up with something interesting......"espionage," "beef jerkey," or "breakdancing."

No, Waters never saw it. BYU's prelaw adviser told me to leave it off.

Based off your LSAT and what I would anticipate your GPA to be, you could put that you were Time's 1938 Man of the Year and still get callbacks at a lot of top schools.

Ballista, non-alternative energy sources and cat hats.

Well, no kidding. Wouldn't you want to meet Time's 1938 Man of the year?

Fantasy Football, message boards and betting on sports

I always wanted to work mine into a bio blurb in the third person like they do for authors on the back of the book:

When she's not busy writing the next great American novel, Ms. Gordon might be found crashing Mormon internet boards or feigning wardrobe malfunctions. She's a passionate college football fan and remains hopeful that her team will, in fact, manage to win a bowl game sometime this century. She watches Gameday religiously, and is convinced that Kirk Herbstreit will eventually return her phone calls.
Her skills as a housekeeper are suspect, but they are superior to her recent performances as a triathlete. And the fledgling plants outside her home would very much appreciate it if she would abandon her attempts at gardening. She lives in the reddest state in the union with her husband and their two sons, and a Golden Retriever cleverly named Goldie.

You're right. No one else should be chosen. It's just hard to imagine. But how do you explain Rudy Giuliani in 2001, instead of GWB? Or Time's steadfast refusal ever to choose GWB, even at the end of 2003, when he decided to swagger into Iraq? I ask this not as a Bush fan (I am not) but just as an observer who really does think, um, that Time does, um, have that librull bias. You aren't really saying they are objective, are you? Say it ain't so, PAC . . . .

I think my chances have gone down.

You do know that Hitler won it in 1938, right?