Time mag running contest for person of the year: Arafat winning - Vote for Ariel Sharon

Time Contest ^ | December 20, 2002 | Trouble North

[Trouble North of the Border]

URGENT!!!

TIME MAGAZINE is running a contest to choose: PERSON OF THE YEAR!!

ARAFAT is RUNNING in FIRST PLACE at about 20% vs. Ariel Sharon at 11%- absurd but true- everyone else is way back there!

PLEASE VOTE IMMEDIATELY FOR Ariel Sharon - you don't want to dilute the vote by voting for others!

PLEASE CIRCULATE THIS TO YOUR LISTS!!!

Click on this URL and vote for Sharon! Go to:: www.time.com/time/personoftheyear

[Trouble North of the Border]

http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/

Go to link above:-)

[Gone_Postal]

lets have some fun everyone vote for the Corporate Crooks

[concerned about politics]

We could use a few more players. Voted, but the terrorist is still ahead.

[Salvation]

Who should TIME pick as the 2002 Person of the Year?

Total Votes Cast: 2858223

[TheBattman]

What sort of drunken, stoned, crackheads came up with that list?

[Sparta]

Arabfatty is gaining on Sharon.

[Ciexyz]

Why should I vote for Ariel Sharon? I'd vote for President Bush to be Person of the Year. (Was glad to see that A&E voted him Biography of the Year.)

[liberty or death]

The same type that vote for Yessir I'maRat.

[Texas Eagle]

Not to be a wet blanket, but I couldn't care less who TIME picks as its Thing of the Year.

[JohnnyRidden]

Remember that Time voted Hitler as man of the year. God willing Arafat will copy his idol and die for all of the suffering he has caused.

[Texas Eagle]

I can't remember the other preposterous selections but I sure as hell wouldn't want to win the same "award" that was bestowed upon Hitler.

[A CA Guy]

Anyone notice the total of all percentages equals between 50-60% at any given time?

Who the heck has the finger of the button of the rest of this vote?

[bluefish]

It is about who did the most to change the news, for better or for worse.

It's not a popularity contest, so don't be so concerened. The weight of the coverage in the last few weeks, in my opinion, would almost suggest the appropriate person for the Title is whatever DemocRAT scum came up with and coordinated the Lott attack, which is now being trasferred to Pubblies in general. Some may say Lott himself if coverage of his remarks were being considered. However, I don't think the remarks generated the news coverage. It was the coordinated race-baiting on the part of the Dems. Smart move on their part. They knew Lott wasn't popular enough among true conservatives for them to stand behind him like the sheep Dems do for their sleazy characters.

[John_11_25]

I completely agree. The voted Albet E. man of the century.

Without his theory the world would have survived easily.

However without Winston Churchill. There could quite possibly be no Time Mag.

[MissAmericanPie]

If you vote for Sharon they will twist it to say he changed the world for the worse, nothing is beneath the scummy Times.

[steve50]

I like Rowley, a true American hero. Much easier career move for her to have kept her mouth shut, but she had the courage to tell the truth. Not a common occurence in todays government. If we show we respect this kind of action we just might get more of it.

[Noumenon]

Let's not be hasty, here. And for two reasons:

1. Who gives a flip about Time's choices?

2. An Arafat cover makes for a great 100 yard target.

[afuturegovernor]

They gave the stupid "award" to the whistle blowers. The poll now on the website asks if you agree with the choice and nearly 97% say no right now.

[Wondervixen]

You'd think after all these years TIME would learn...Stop calling it "Person of the year" and call it "Newsmaker of the year".