Why does Time Magazine name "the protestor" person of the year bother Repubs so much?

[SAT2]

I see emotions run rampant from the right.

 

[Sunni Man]

I am a Republican and could care less if Time Magazine made "protesters" person of the year.

In fact, until I read this thread.

I didn't realize that TM was still in circulation.

 

[bripat9643]

Michelle Malkin was whining on Fox this morning. Not course she deployed the gripe that goes like this

"instead of doing *blank* they should've done *blank*"

Which is always the complaint of the person without any real complaints. So why do repubs disagree or hate every protest or protestor?

Time is a has-been rag headed down the chute towards bankruptcy, so why would I care?

 

[ginscpy]

I don't care who Time names as person of the year -as long it is not themed.

(althoughtI did find it curiouswhy they made a long explanation why they named Einstein Person of theCentury over Hitler)

 

[ClosedCaption]

The issue is an indication that libs use emotion rather than reason. A lot of things "bother" libs so they assume that republicans are as emotional as they are. I venture a guess that not many people on either side care who Time magazine likes or whether Jen Anniston is really pregnant with twins..

Michelle Malkin was whining about Time Magazine. Michelle Malkin is a conservative. Michelle Malkin was using emotion. I know its hard for you but "liberals" arent mentioned anywhere here until you brought them up as a deflection

 

[old navy]

Malkin whined about it therefore all righties are up in arms about the choice by Time.

Wait a minute, is Time still a magazine?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Malkin whined about it therefore all righties are up in arms about the choice by Time.

Wait a minute, is Time still a magazine?

Perpetual victim, no one said all...victim

 

[Jarhead]

The issue is an indication that libs use emotion rather than reason. A lot of things "bother" libs so they assume that republicans are as emotional as they are. I venture a guess that not many people on either side care who Time magazine likes or whether Jen Anniston is really pregnant with twins..

Michelle Malkin was whining about Time Magazine. Michelle Malkin is a conservative. Michelle Malkin was using emotion. I know its hard for you but "liberals" arent mentioned anywhere here until you brought them up as a deflection

Michelle Malkin is a commentator. She does not speak FOR the conservative....she speaks TO the conservative.

Jeanine Garofolo said that the tea partyers are racists.

Should I assume all liberals say the tea partyers as racists?

If yes...please cite evidence.....not an isolated picture of one person in a ralley of thousands holding some sign.

 

[Full-Auto]

Michelle Malkin was whining on Fox this morning. Not course she deployed the gripe that goes like this

"instead of doing *blank* they should've done *blank*"

Which is always the complaint of the person without any real complaints. So why do repubs disagree or hate every protest or protestor?

Because they're essentially conformists. After all, keep in mind that the 'conservative' colonists of the late 18th century supported King George.

Horse shit!!!!

These clowns that pretended to have a cause were all over the board. My complaint form the onset was lack of clarity and the inability to address the right group.

Now stay stupid it makes you feel better.

 

[Jarhead]

Malkin whined about it therefore all righties are up in arms about the choice by Time.

Wait a minute, is Time still a magazine?

Perpetual victim, no one said all...victim

Interesting....

I seem to recall your very first post in this thread saying...

"So why do repubs disagree or hate every protest or protestor?"

Seems to me that was a statement referring to the republicans as a collective.

 

[Dragon]

To the extent that Republicans actually are bothered by Time's choice, which I can't verify, it would surely be because our most recent large-scale protest has been on the part of Occupy. If Time had made the same choice last year, they would probably have applauded.

However -- I have to say that it's a good choice (as was Hitler). Protesters have rocked the boat all over the world this year, in Europe, the Middle East, and of course here. I also have a sense, which I'm trying to get into a set of coherent thoughts to write a blog post about, that this is a permanent change arising from social media.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The issue is an indication that libs use emotion rather than reason. A lot of things "bother" libs so they assume that republicans are as emotional as they are. I venture a guess that not many people on either side care who Time magazine likes or whether Jen Anniston is really pregnant with twins..

Michelle Malkin was whining about Time Magazine. Michelle Malkin is a conservative. Michelle Malkin was using emotion. I know its hard for you but "liberals" arent mentioned anywhere here until you brought them up as a deflection

Michelle Malkin is a commentator. She does not speak FOR the conservative....she speaks TO the conservative.

Jeanine Garofolo said that the tea partyers are racists.

Should I assume all liberals say the tea partyers as racists?

If yes...please cite evidence.....not an isolated picture of one person in a ralley of thousands holding some sign.

Read the post above Mr Victim, no one said all Mr Victim. Thanks for crying tho

 

[Jarhead]

To the extent that Republicans actually are bothered by Time's choice, which I can't verify, it would surely be because our most recent large-scale protest has been on the part of Occupy. If Time had made the same choice last year, they would probably have applauded.

However -- I have to say that it's a good choice (as was Hitler). Protesters have rocked the boat all over the world this year, in Europe, the Middle East, and of course here. I also have a sense, which I'm trying to get into a set of coherent thoughts to write a blog post about, that this is a permanent change arising from social media.

Seeing as no one will say it...I will....

Conservatives raised an eyebroiw at the selection in light of how the tea party movement was portrayed by the media and by democrats in Washington.

If you recall, it recieved a lot of negative press. Tea partyers were referred to as astro turf...unproven....referred to as racists...unproven..referred to as hostage takers by the speaker of the house....rediculous....

The message of the tea party was ignored by the press and, instead, the few deviants were reported by the press.

As for the OWS....those that blasted the "anitcs" of the tea party, heralded the OWS movement despite the more obvious "antics" of the protesters.

To this day, the tea party movement was never given true credibility, yet the OWS is portrayed as a movement that will live on for years.

We do not frown on protest.

We frown on the media's portrayal of protest based on its own ideology.

Argue it if you want......but both movements were viewed diffferently by the media....and reported differently.

 

[editec]

I doubt it much "bothers" Republicans one way or the other.

As to a coherent message of the protestors?

I think it was fairly coherent.

The Tea Party folks took their protestsd to Washington, where the people they are disgusted with work.

The OWS folks took their protest to WALL STREET, where the people they are disgusted with work.

Both messages are a clear as a bell to anyone who isn't blinded by their own partisanship.

 

[Jarhead]

Michelle Malkin was whining about Time Magazine. Michelle Malkin is a conservative. Michelle Malkin was using emotion. I know its hard for you but "liberals" arent mentioned anywhere here until you brought them up as a deflection

Michelle Malkin is a commentator. She does not speak FOR the conservative....she speaks TO the conservative.

Jeanine Garofolo said that the tea partyers are racists.

Should I assume all liberals say the tea partyers as racists?

If yes...please cite evidence.....not an isolated picture of one person in a ralley of thousands holding some sign.

Read the post above Mr Victim, no one said all Mr Victim. Thanks for crying tho

whatever...back pedal all you want.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Michelle Malkin was whining on Fox this morning. Not course she deployed the gripe that goes like this

"instead of doing *blank* they should've done *blank*"

Which is always the complaint of the person without any real complaints. So why do repubs disagree or hate every protest or protestor?

Because they're essentially conformists. After all, keep in mind that the 'conservative' colonists of the late 18th century supported King George.

Horse shit!!!!

These clowns that pretended to have a cause were all over the board. My complaint form the onset was lack of clarity and the inability to address the right group.
Now stay stupid it makes you feel better.

The right group? According to who? You? the arbiter of rightness?

 

[Avatar4321]

It bothers me now? Why am I the last to know?

I do have a problem with them choosing groups instead of individuals, but it's their irrevlant award. I just think it be nice to represent it for what it actually is. But that's not really that big a deal.

They are supposed to choose the person who made the most news this year. I am hard pressed to find someone who influenced the news more than the various protesters in the world. Some just forget that the standard is "influenced the news the most" and not just the best person period.

 

[konradv]

doesn't bother me. I disagree with the choice, but hell... they chose Hitler once too...

...and Stalin twice!!! I guess the wingnuts will read something into that, too.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It's their opinion. And its one of the reasons I don't read their tripe any longer.

 

[konradv]

To me the designation of "Person of the Year" lost a lot of its luster when TIME caved to rightwing pressure in '01 and gave Giuliani the nod, instead of bin Laden. I've always felt it should highlight an international figure that did the most to change the world, good or bad, and Giuliani was only a national figure.