I know what what your saying myland2 but he won't see it as for bad and I agree with where your coming from too Pat. But to me it's the same as giving it to Bin Laden for 2001,(he wasn't was he? I don't remember.)
Plus I don't think he deserves it twice in four years,his head is swollen enough!!!

I believe that I heard something on NPR that Bush was being made Time's cover boy because of the incredible polarization of the US (& probably the rest of the world, as well) that he has caused. I wouldn't call him "person of the year", though. More like ....well, never mind. There may be kids reading this!

<img src="http://www.arlo.net/ubb/smilies/peace.gif" width=16 height=16>
Capt. Zap

Well, look at it this way. In 1979, Time named the Ayatollah Khomeini the man (person) of the year. They defended the pick by saying it wasn't necessarily an honor to be selected, just that the person had the most impact.

By the way, Rudy Giuliani was named in 2001.

Thanks Mikey, saved me looking it up!
Weezie.

I'm not sure, and I've yet to look it up....but didn't Adolph get named the same thing way back when?

Yep... 1938...
Other names...

Nikita Kruschev, Josef Stalin, Mohandas Gandhi, Jimmy Carter...

'Young People' were named in 1966... I think that included a few of us!

You can take a look at the List HERE

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wyldflower:
'Young People' were named in 1966... I think that included a few of us!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1966 "I was so much older then I'm younger than that now"
yeah sure

I really hate Clear Channel now & with good reason. In Cincinnati , OH there is a radio station called WSAI 1530 am which used to be the old WCKY am. You can get WSAI on the radio at nite time in many states including VA. A few yrs ago WSAI switched to a rock & roll oldies format & was a GREAT radio station. They had a format called real oldies where they played the rock & roll of the 50's/60's & early 70's.

WSAI is owned by Clear Channel & sadly they have decided to ignore WSAI's listeners by dropping the rock & roll oldies format from WSAI & switching it to a liberal talk format. This is an outrage to those of us who loved the oldies on WSAI. Not to mention the fact that no one wants to hear a talk station instead of the oldies. I think the station maybe changing back to the old WCKY name as well. This affects not only people in Ohio but anyone in any states who can get WSAI/WCKY's signal. It's a sad day for radio & those of us who love the oldies. This has got me so mad... They are not switching formats cuz they love liberals & their causes. They are doing it hoping to make money off of them.

So we are asking people to please boycott WSAI/WCKY & do not listen to them & their new talk format. If no one listens to them they will hopefully flop in the ratings & see that in order to do well they will have to switch back to the rock & roll oldies format. You may want to call or e-mail them & ask them to please switch back to the oldies format.

Also it appears they have taken over another good oldies station in Ohio as well. The old WCOL 1230 am in Columbus. They had been the big am rock & roll station in Columbus in the 60's & 70's I think. A few yrs ago WCOL am had also switched to the real oldies format like WSAI had. It appears they are switching WCOL am to the liberal talk format & changing their name as well just like with WSAI. So you'll want to boycott 1230 Am in Columbus, OH as well. It's so sad but this is 2005 & sadly is not the world we lived in the 60's. If you want to listen to a liberal talk station do try to listen to another one instead of WSAI/WCKY or WCOL am...

If you want to hear the rock & roll oldies they are on WKBW 1520 am in Buffalo, NY which you can get in many other states at nite as well...

I won't listen to Clear Channel stations unless they are an oldies station & even then I hold my breath wondering how long they will be an oldies station...

I also so read that one of Clear Channel's stations had a comp, asking women why they would like breast implants for Christmas and the winner got free implants? Another good reason not to listen to them!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow, that's weird. I'll only listen to a Clear channel station if it's an oldies station. Other than that I won't listen to them. They take our good oldies stations away from us & switch them to other formats...

I think it's interesting that Clear Channel, which many of us have come to think of as simply another arm of the Republican Noise Machin, is now floating liberal talk radio.

I haven't yet read Jim Wallaces's Who Speaks for God but it seemed like a hopeful sign that he and his book were on the Daily Show just a day after a writer was on CSPAN's Washington Journal, discussing among other things, how there are more than one kind of evangelical Christian and they don't all think that gay marriage and abortion are the only, or necessarily the most important, moral issues we face.

I'm mildy hopeful that a clue might be about to filter out to the people that voted for Bush and against themselves.

<center><FONT COLOR="#000080">--- Edited 1 times, lastly by pat on Jan 19, 2005 ---</FONT></center>

It was a sad day for the people of this earth - and most of the people of this earth know it -

I recently found another good oldies station we can get here at nite. WRLL 1690 am in Chicago & yo can listen to them online. I noticed on there website it liasted them as being affiliated with Clear Channel. I just pray to God Clear Channel doesn't ever switch them from their oldies format...

Cheney says U.S. to confront Iran

Israel might act first to destroy Mideast nation’s nuclear program, vice president says

By PAUL RICHTER

Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON — In bluntly threatening terms on inauguration day, Vice President Dick Cheney removed any doubt Thursday that in its second term the Bush administration intends to confront the theocracy in Iran directly.

Cheney, who often has delivered the Bush team’s toughest warnings internationally, said Iran is “right at the top” of the administration’s list of world trouble spots, and expressed concern that Israel “might well decide to act first” to destroy Iran’s nuclear program.

The Israelis would let the rest of the world “worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterward,” he added in an MSNBC interview.

The tough talk on this day was part of the administration’s attempt to halt what Iran contends is a peaceful, civilian nuclear energy program but what Washington believes is a clandestine program to develop nuclear weapons.

Facing weak diplomatic and military options, the Bush administration has issued increasingly stern warnings in hopes threats of sanctions and international isolation would convince Iran to shun nuclear weapons.

Both President Bush and other top administration officials have spoken in menacing terms about Iran in recent days.

But Cheney’s words marked the first time a senior official has amplified the threat by suggesting the United States could be unable to prevent a military attack by its close allies in Jerusalem, said analysts and diplomats.

The startling reference to an Israeli attack was “the kind of strong language that will get their attention in Tehran,” said one allied diplomat in Washington, who asked to remain unidentified.

“There’s a rhetorical escalation here: They’ve ratcheted up the threat level by bringing Israel in,” said Henri J. Barkey, a former State Department official during the Clinton administration. “They’re using the fact of the inauguration, and the uncertainty people have about where they’re going in the next term, to say, ‘Look, we’re not going to let up on Iran.’”

Despite Iranian denials, Cheney said the United States believes Tehran has a “fairly robust, new nuclear program.” Germany, France and Britain are trying to negotiate with Iran on the issue, an approach U.S. officials say they support but refuse to join as they express doubts over its prospects.

Cheney said the American emphasis is on diplomacy and supporting the European efforts. But he added, “At some point, if the Iranians don’t live up to their commitments, the next step will be to take it to the United Nations Security Council and seek the imposition of international sanctions.”

U.S. officials cited Iraq’s failure to live up to U.N. resolutions on its weapons programs as a reason for launching the war against that nation that has been going on for nearly two years. Despite the administration’s insistence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, no such weapons have been found.

Reports have swirled over recent weeks that U.S. officials have contemplated ways of taking military action against Iran, but Cheney raised the stakes by suggesting Israel might step in and act first. Cheney addressed the issue when asked whether the United States could ask Israel to take the lead in military action against Iran.

“One of the concerns that people have is that Israel might do it without being asked,” Cheney said. “If, in fact, the Israelis became convinced the Iranians had significant nuclear capability — given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel — the Israelis might well decide to act first.”

Israeli analysts have said they believe Iran could develop a bomb in two to three years; U.S. intelligence has predicted it could take slightly longer. Israeli officials have said they might turn to military strikes as a last resort and as a way to set the Iranian program back by 10 to 15 years.

This week, a report in New Yorker magazine said U.S. commandos had been operating inside Iran to find potential targets for attack. The Pentagon said the report was “riddled with errors,” but it did not directly deny that commandos had entered Iran.

In response, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran’s influential former president, said the country “will not be intimidated by foreign enemies’ threats and sanctions.”

Israel has expressed anxiety over Iran’s stance.

“Iran poses a clear threat to international peace and security,” said an Israeli diplomat, who asked to remain unidentified.

“Iran is a leading sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East, while actively developing weapons of mass destruction and nuclear programs. The world should unite and pressure Iran from these destructive activities.”

- Reuters
"A majority of people surveyed in a global poll, which included Australia, think the re-election of George W Bush as US President has made the world more dangerous."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200501/s1285320.htm