Lion's Weekend Blurb - May 4-6

[Lion]

I just know I'm gonna regret getting political for the weekend blurb, but I'm a glutton for punishment. This week Time magazine released it's annual list of the most influential people in the world, and guess who wasn't on the list? Would you believe George Bush? No matter who is in office, or how popular he is, the President of the United States is THE most powerful man in the world hands down, and as such wields great influence. Power and influence do go hand in hand. Although some people would argue his words don't carry the weight they once did, the decisions he makes changes the way our world runs. Regardless, it's obvious Time magazine, well known for it's liberal far left views, has snubbed the office of the Presidency. When you consider Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Raul Castro, the brother of Fidel, and numerous other dip sticks made the list, something stinks. Time magazine's editor did state in defense they were looking for most influential people, not most powerful. But how the heck can ya have one without the other? So the debate for the weekend...should President George Bush be on the Most Influential Peeps list? :chin:

[Jamie T]

>.< politics, bush is every were he must be.
any dutch on there :scared:

maybe its a complot, let spread the word...

ps. did you get my pager?

[KrasnyOktyabr]

Of course he should be.

Now Pelosi? Obama? Hillary? All three of them on the list? Something is wrong there. Obama should be, like him or not he's made quite the stir.

[Derek]

I would agree with those three Democrats on the list, they have all been in the news quite a bit lately and taken prominant positions in the House and Senate, which the Democrats now control. However Fidel's brother on the list and Bush not? Thats just not right. Bush has more influence in one finger than that guy (specifically, the finger that can press the button). I'm with Lion that, barring extreme circumstances, the President is always one of the most influential people in the world.

[SgtRicko]

Maybe Time got tired of listing US presidents on the list or something, cause it makes no sense at all to say that Bush is NOT globally influential in any shape or form whatsoever.:nuts:

[canman87]

I think he should have definitely been on that list. One of the most influential people on the list, in fact.

Influence does not necessarily always have to be positive. Hell, Hitler and Stalin were some of the most influential people in history, but you would be hard pressed to find someone who thought they were doing something right. I mean, c'mon. WWII? The Cold War? Those were events set in motion (at least in part) by Hitler and Stalin (respectively).

Bush may be an idiot (in my opinion), but I won't deny that he has influenced this world we live in in more ways than one.

Apparently, Time doesn't know how to define "influential"... :|

[Iamrecognized]

I actually agree with him not being on the list.

He is literally so useless now that I have stopped paying attention to him. It's like something that gets so annoying you just stop caring. Sure his finger is 'on the button,' but does he actually wield that much power? Legally, of course he does, but the discontent of the American people and the Democratic majority in Congress really does put him in check. Bush has, at least psychologically lessened the power of the Presidency, just as all of the things Congress did to censure Andrew Jonson after the Civil War led to a long list of very weak Presidents (basically all of them up to TR) that could not do much, even though they technically had the same authority Lincoln did. So realistically, Bush has little to no influence on the way I deal with things or think about things, because I simply ignore him now. But I listen to and evaluate what Obama and Clinton have to say, because at least they have shown that they may be at least competent.

[Probowler]

I don't agree with this. Sure maybe he's not as influential as he once was, but he is a hell of alot more influential then those other people. Bush still has plenty of influence and power. He was able to stop congess from making a toop deadline wasin't he?

[Mattran!]

I can't agree with Time Magazine, as Lion said regardless of who is in office at the time the President of the United States will have influence, both domestically and internationally. What's the context of this 'Most Influential' List? Unfortunately I haven't read the article but from what I've read here it seems that Time Magazine has indulged in some petty criticism and hasn't backed up its decision not to include the President with any form of evidence or reason other than the rather flimsy 'we're looking at influence not power'

In summary, seems to be petty, but on the otherhand it is generating a lot of publicity for itself... Perhaps the motive is to increase readership through not including the President, thus creating controversy...

Boy this is far to early for this kind of thinking!

To breakfast!

[iZZ]

i fully agree with derek & lion..
to me it just seems like provocation not to put bush on to that list.
but i figure that to be nothing special since every teenager in the world, who gets his info on the news, knows that bush is (/one of) the most influential (/men) man in the world..

:dork:

[KnightShift]

in·flu·en·tial play_w("I0133100") (http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gifnhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gifflhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/oomacr.gif-http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ebreve.gifnhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gifshhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gifl)adj. Having or exercising influence.

n. One that is of considerable importance or influence: sought the advice of policy influentials.

inhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gifflu·enhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.giftial·ly adv.

'Importance' and 'influence' are concepts that break down to an individuals opinion.
Theres no argument that Bush hold power, but, lets face it: someone is only influential in an individuals life to the extent that the individual -actually cares- to concern themselves with that 'someones' actions.

[General Al Ramsey]

Let me shoot your foot LION. This is no accident that Bush is not on the list. The liberal elite press thinks he is dipstick and therefor he does not influence them. However, Nancy (big mouth) Pelosi can go to Syria (who are arming the insurgents in Iraq) and she is applauded by the media for going. Excuse me, but don't you think that this is going to be counter productive? I like what Dick (don't shoot me) Cheney said. "We don't need 535 Secretaries of State". He was referring to other members of congress who think they can just run out to any country in the world, especially our enemies. To me she has totally undermined everything President Bush has stood for in the middle east. Yet she is hailed as a hero in the liberal elite press. :yuck: These people have so weakened the President to be an effective leader, with their anti-american BS.

Then to put on Raul Castro is in insult to injury. :nuts:

[Ace]

i read tha Obama is all over the place so im really thinking its gonna be Hillary thats gonna be the one democrat to rule them all :D with of course her husband Bill on the sideline giving some advice or helping to repair the Us foreign relations that are shacky and messed up after the Bush goverments total one man army attititude. :p

[sniperelite7]

Gah just thinking of Hilary makes my trigger finger itch. I have nothing agasint the idea of female presidents, but c'mon Hilary? Forget Bush, Hilary is the Antichrist.

[KrasnyOktyabr]

Hillary Clinton is a tool.

[nilloC]

Hahah, Bush is about as influential as the **** I took this afternoon.

He can say whatever, but he is held in check in nearly all realms. The only power he holds is the ability to veto bills now. He's lost the respect of 3/4 of the country. OH yeah. Real influential.

However to say Castro's brother is influential... Odd. Don't blame this on the 'liberal' media though. Just as many 'conservative' media outlets. Both right and left sucks. Get over it.

[CnConrad]

Its really quite simple my friend, Time MAG. is absolute trash. Thats it, they hate America and all things it stands for.


I have lost all all faith in the newspapers. They print trash with no checks or balances.

[AI]

I think he should have definitely been on that list. One of the most influential people on the list, in fact.

Influence does not necessarily always have to be positive. Hell, Hitler and Stalin were some of the most influential people in history, but you would be hard pressed to find someone who thought they were doing something right. I mean, c'mon. WWII? The Cold War? Those were events set in motion (at least in part) by Hitler and Stalin (respectively).
You wouldn't really be that hard pressed to find somebody who thought what they were doing was right, because they did do a great many things right. It's just the reprecussions of the wars tend to outweigh those things.

[Iamrecognized]

I do agree though that TIME left him out because they hate him, along with the rest of the sensible people in the world.

[tbeckner]

in·flu·en·tial play_w("I0133100") (http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gifnhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gifflhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/oomacr.gif-http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ebreve.gifnhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gifshhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gifl)adj. Having or exercising influence.

n. One that is of considerable importance or influence: sought the advice of policy influentials.

inhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/lprime.gifflu·enhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.giftial·ly adv.

'Importance' and 'influence' are concepts that break down to an individuals opinion.
Theres no argument that Bush hold power, but, lets face it: someone is only influential in an individuals life to the extent that the individual -actually cares- to concern themselves with that 'someones' actions.

I have to agree with NighShift, people have to care about your opinion and/or actions, and worldwide a LOT OF PEOPLE really don't care about Bush's opinions and/or actions.

Outside of the US and to a far lesser degree in the US Bush is and has been viewed as laughable for sometime.

If people do not respect you, you lose your influence.

IMHO, George W Bush appears to be the first modern American President to lose respect not only in most of the rest of the world, but also across both political parties in the US, from of course the far left, but also from the far right and the moderates in the Republican Party.

And for your information I view myself as a moderate (with mostly far right conservative views), and yes, I voted for both Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush.

[Korona]

Even the most powerful man in the world can be a victim of fate and of the course of history. Circumstances can be such that only one course of action is really left open to you. If you rate influence by the ability to effect change, then Bush has shot his bolt in many respects. Even his veto of the troop bill (which everyone with any sense knew he would do) demonstrates that he is now performing damage limitation to try and keep the events he set in motion earlier in his term on a moderatly coherent course.

[Slapper]

i think i can sum it up quickly.

Your enemies are no longer afraid of the Mighty USA, because he mucked up this Iraq fight from Day 1. They have become emboldened. Iran, North Korea and a host of other nations. The influence and power of past U.S Presidents words no longer exceed other Leaders common sense and fear of destruction at the hands of the U.S Military. They all know hit and run tactics and Guerilla Warfare can bog down the mightiest of the mighty.

Your Dems and Left Wingers at home have made him inconsequential in the eyes of the public, especially since the Dems now hold Congress. He is nothing but a stooge on his last ride into the sunset. Thats the picture the media paints and so do the Dems....his days are numbered, we all know it.

This was a purposeful snub of the man who holds immense power and influence. Sending a message me thinks......

Regardless of that, id rather see 10 GW Bush's in succession than any of the Dem Candidates so far. Big Mouth Pelosi and Hilary.....right...no offense to Women worldwide and call me chauvanistic if you like, but i would not want anyone controlling a Nuclear Arsenal who has hormone ups and downs at their ages running my Country. 1 Bad Hair day or bad mood...well......kaboom...Menopause makes some Women go sideways. Ask my wife. She is the one who said this part, not me.

The Times make it a regular habit to snub GW and ridicule him. This isnt the 1st time is it.....

[nilloC]

i think i can sum it up quickly.
Your enemies are no longer afraid of the Mighty USA, because he mucked up this Iraq fight from Day 1. They have become emboldened. Iran, North Korea and a host of other nations. The influence and power of past U.S Presidents words no longer exceed other Leaders common sense and fear of destruction at the hands of the U.S Military. They all know hit and run tactics and Guerilla Warfare can bog down the mightiest of the mighty.
Your Dems and Left Wingers at home have made him inconsequential in the eyes of the public, especially since the Dems now hold Congress. He is nothing but a stooge on his last ride into the sunset. Thats the picture the media paints and so do the Dems....his days are numbered, we all know it.
This was a purposeful snub of the man who holds immense power and influence. Sending a message me thinks......
Regardless of that, id rather see 10 GW Bush's in succession than any of the Dem Candidates so far. Big Mouth Pelosi and Hilary.....right...no offense to Women worldwide and call me chauvanistic if you like, but i would not want anyone controlling a Nuclear Arsenal who has hormone ups and downs at their ages running my Country. 1 Bad Hair day or bad mood...well......kaboom...Menopause makes some Women go sideways. Ask my wife. She is the one who said this part, not me.
The Times make it a regular habit to snub GW and ridicule him. This isnt the 1st time is it.....

You're just as close minded using exellent stereotypes as the people you're bitching about on the far left. Your fear of women obviously means compensation for something. I won't call you chauvanistic as much as a completely close-minded bigot.

Seriously, way to ashame men everywhere. I don't care if your wife did say that. I suppose your wife is also an expert scientist and has done research on menopause, stating that women cannot control anything while they're on the rag.

Christ almighty, get the hell out of here. I can't believe we still have remnants of this thought around today; although I suppose it doesn't surprise me.

[killcrazy]

George Bush has abused his office.

The number of people supporting him has crashed over the last four years. He wasted the worldwide political momentum he had after 911, squandering it through a succession of events like Abu Ghraib. We're losing the war but we can't leave.

Yeah, he's still one of the most dangerous men in the world but he doesn't deserve the implied respect of Time's stupid list.

If you're so concerned about the "snubbing of the office of the president," then surely you couldn't possibly support Bush, a man who disrespected and misused his power since the day he first sat down at his desk.

[HawkEye1102002]

Gah just thinking of Hilary makes my trigger finger itch. I have nothing agasint the idea of female presidents, but c'mon Hilary? Forget Bush, Hilary is the Antichrist.

Haha, I loved that one.

I do think it is no acident Bush is not on the list, he tried to be Churchill by toppling two fascist regimes and not planning how to deal with the aftermath. Now toppling to regimes is influential in my books, but there again the Liberals hate that a rival party has toppled two regimes.

Sadly, common sense does not exist in government any more, it is puerly political, governed by idolagy and party polotics, ideolagy is too influential in the media in my oppinion (This is especially true in the United Kingdom) so Time should put its editor (as well as other media editors) down as one of the most influential people in the world (Yes Time is for sale in the United Kingdom if you must know)


Yeah, he's still one of the most dangerous men in the world but he doesn't deserve the implied respect of Time's stupid list.

So Hamas, Hesbullah and the Iranian dictator is no threat?

[eLDiablo]

Regardless of that, id rather see 10 GW Bush's in succession than any of the Dem Candidates so far.

So you don't like Black people then?

[Massacure]

Bush's influences has imploded over the last couple years. Bush has toppled more than just the political leadership of Iraq and Afghanistan, Italy and Spain have also had prime ministers toppled due to their relationship with Bush. And having a 28% approval rating by Rasmussen's latest poll certainly doesn't help him. No president has had such a low approval rating since Jimmy Carter.

As for the sub-debate about Democratic candidates, I think it's interesting how the Democrats are pitting a woman versus an african-american. I'd rather not see Hillary nominated as 32 or 36 years of Clintons and Bushes is getting a little too close to a dynasty for my taste, and I really don't think Obama has a rats chance in hell at winning over southern states. It's such a shame Edwards isn't doing better than he is, because it looks like the Democrats are going to commit political suicide at one of their most opportunistic moments.

[GeneralGao]

Alan Greenspan:wtf:

Retired or not, this man still can leave the world in his wake with just his grocery list.

[Mikael Grizzly]

I think the decision of not puting Whyt-- W. Bush (sorry, Diamonds Are Forever mode) there is warranted. Pretty much no government in Europe really takes America's opinion into consideration (except Poland, but that's the price of having retards run the country).

[NuclearDreams]

Since when does having an open mind about everything automatically give you wisdom? You should tolerate and care for your fellow man or woman, but that does not mean that you have to like or agree with how they live. Looking past a person’s outer to the inner parts of the heart and intellect will surprise you and maybe even increase your own knowledge and wisdom. Showing them respect as a living being is their right, but maintaining your own individual opinions and morals is also your right. For someone to say “you should be done away with”, because you don’t agree with his or her style of living or political persuasion is an injustice to ones personal self government. It is amazing how some try to cram their own persuasions down others throats, how they will try everything to be seen and heard even to those who want nothing to do with them.

Conservatives and Liberals both have equal rights to express what they accept and what they don’t. The problem lies in that one side is busy listening only to what the others won’t tolerate and the opposite side is busy rejecting the person for what he does.

[Teho]

USA is the leader of the world? :lmao: :lmao: