December 19, 2007

Time's Submission of The Year

Time Magazine has declared Russian strongman Vladimir Putin as their 2007 Person of the Year. It should come as little surprise. Time's award has become increasingly irrelevant over the years, and I say that as a past winner who was equally deserving of the award.

Time selected a man that lorded over a Russian security service that apparently murdered a former intelligence officer Alexander Litvinenko in London and refused to extradite his accused murderer, Andrei Lugovoi, which led to the expulsion of four Russian envoys by the British government in protest. That Putin obliquely compared the United States to Nazi Germany earleir this year also probably scored Putin points among Time's editors.

The fact that Putin's critics in the Russian media tend to wind up dead somehow escaped their glowing review—or perhaps inspired it.

17 Russian journalists have been killed since Putin came to power, 14 of which are described as contract murders. None of the 14 murders have ever been solved, including the murders of three journalists—Marina Pisareva, Konstantin Brovko, and Ivan Safronov—in 2007.

Perhaps Time selected their Person of the Year for 2007 not for political or editorial reasons, but for that most basic human desire... survival.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at December 19, 2007 10:20 AM

Do they have no shame?

Posted by: Mekan at December 19, 2007 10:52 AM

I suspect that at some time in the future(no pun intended), the editorial kneepads at Time will be bronzed and put on display in the Kremlin.

Posted by: Conservative CBU at December 19, 2007 11:48 AM

Communist sympathizers honoring a brutal Communist...who would of thunk it?

Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at December 19, 2007 12:13 PM

They long for the Old Days of the big and powerful USSR, cold-war spy games, and the Berlin Wall... Sheesh.

Posted by: DirtCrashr at December 19, 2007 01:47 PM

Time magazine Communist sympathizers? Really?

The same Time magazine that exists on corporate advertising money? Communists?

The same Time magazine that made George W. Bush Man of the Year not once, but twice? Communists?

Call them irrelevant, as I do, but Communist sympathizers? Hardly.

Posted by: David Terrenoire at December 19, 2007 02:16 PM

The same magazine that made Gorbachov, and not Reagan, the man of the 80's? Yeah. THOSE Communist sympathizers.

Posted by: tsmonk at December 19, 2007 03:42 PM

You're aware that they don't necessarily give the award for a person's goodness, right?

Posted by: novanom at December 19, 2007 04:03 PM

The criteria for selection are the person who most affects the news of the year, good or bad.
Sure, he's a slimeball, but if this year they are going to ignore General Petraeus(who really has affected the news coming out of Iraq), or even their dear friend ALGore, who, even if he is a lying shyster, is affecting the news greatly. One would think they'd go with Ahmanutjob or Chaves the Commie Bastard. Putin does need more coverage, but as Man/Person of the year, he is nearly as lacking as last year's winner.
And they didn't write him up as much of a slimeball either. They kinds glossed over some of the stuff (I have not read it all the way through, but they call his actions bringing stability by shutting down the opposition, etc...if Bush were to think fleetingly to pull that crap would they be so kind?) and he fares well to be another Stalin in many ways (I don't think he could get away with Stalin's Purges, though he probably wishes he could) so in years to come, he may get mentioned, like former "winners" Stalin, Hitler, and Ayatullah Khomeini when next they pick an Evil Winner.

Posted by: JP at December 19, 2007 06:07 PM

The tone deafness is...deafening. Sounds like CY needs a primer on what is going on in the world:

Real Time with Bill Maher: Kasparov on Democracy

Posted by: Frederick at December 19, 2007 06:52 PM

Frederick, sounds like you think that CY is under the impression that it's all great in Russia. However, I'd be interested to know how you can square that with his statement in the original post cited the deaths of 17 journalists.

Or are you, rather, the one that is attempting to make the claim that everything is just fine in Russia?

Posted by: C-C-G at December 20, 2007 12:41 AM

[...] or even their dear friend ALGore, who, even if he is a lying shyster [...]

Al Gore would have to pass the Bar Exam to be a shyster.

Posted by: rosignol at December 20, 2007 02:52 AM

C-C-G I'm saying that CY's insinuation that Time approves of what is going on in Russia is assine. Not being able to recognize the way Putin and Russia has driven events during the last decade, and see what novanom pointed out earlier in the thread is the height of tone deafness. Kasparov explains it well in the clip I linked to.

Posted by: Frederick at December 20, 2007 09:10 AM,16641,19390102,00.html

You know, CY, there's a case to be made that they chose the wrong guy because Putin isn't really all that influential, and if he is, 2007 wasn't the year that really symbolized the peak of his influence. But listing Putin's atrocities as if they're a reason not to pick him just makes your ignorance of all things more plain -- the award is about influence, not about whether they actually like the guy, as the link above shows. All you've accomplished here is looking like a whiner.

Posted by: Alex at December 20, 2007 11:57 AM

A "Man of year" award always implies a level of approval.

--Not for nuthin', but didn't Hitler get it in the Thirties? Maybe they're not commies per se, just toadies and lickspittles generically. If Bush were the tyrant the Left makes him out to be he'd get it every year.

Meanwhile, as for Putin, what big effect exactly has he had? Don't confuse genius with $90 oil. He kills dissidents, OK. Plays footsie with foreign dictators like Ahmadinejad, OK. Tries to punk the neighbors e.g. Georgia, OK. And...what? Regained military parity with the West? Reversed the demographic landslide in Russia? Turned water into wine?

In Russia they say, The moujiks crave the knout (i.e. the lash, or more precisely the club). I think Time craves the knout.

Posted by: nichevo at December 20, 2007 02:04 PM

I guess I have to explain things to far left wing fanatical kooks like David. Read carefully, obviously Putin had little if any influence in the world during 2007, I figured everyone knew that. Therefor to have an avowed Communist and ex KGB member as "Man of the Year" solidifies my previous comment. The intellectual vacancy of the left is stunning!

Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at December 20, 2007 03:22 PM
The intellectual vacancy of the left is stunning!

Shouldn't be. Anyone with a functioning cerebellum who actually uses it should be able to see, for instance, that you can't win a war by surrendering, that you can't raise prosperity by taking money away from people, and that you can't stop terrorists by searching blue-haired grandmas at airports.

Leftism is the refuge of those who cannot or will not use their grey matter.

Posted by: C-C-G at December 20, 2007 07:42 PM

you can't win a war by surrendering

...tell that to Bill O'Reilly.

Posted by: Frederick at December 21, 2007 04:28 PM

Time's picks always make them look the fool later.
With the disclosure of Putin's billions in the days following the Time pick, they have done it again.

Posted by: Neo at December 24, 2007 11:24 AM