|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Who will Win? | |||
| Astros |
   
|
3 | 13.04% |
| Cardinals |
  
|
3 | 13.04% |
| Red Sox (vs Astros) |
  
|
10 | 43.48% |
| Red Sox (vs Cardinals) |
  
|
7 | 30.43% |
| Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#21
11-19-2004, 10:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Time\'s Person of the Year
[ QUOTE ]
why do you keep saying this? In 1992, Perot was a viable candidate, this year Nader wasn't. [/ QUOTE ] My God, do you honestly think Perot got some of the votes that Clinton would have gotten? HAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHA 
|
|
#22
11-20-2004, 01:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time\'s Person of the Year
You're right, of course, Nicky, but if Blair believes his course is right for the country I'd say it's his responsibility to act on that rather than succumb to public opinion - at the risk of his political career. Of course, his job is somewhat safe as you guys are probably unlikely to elect a conservative majority just to ditch him.
Maybe it's my American sensibility speaking (and I don't mean my support for the war). I'm not familiar with the oath your PM takes, but our President doesn't swear to uphold the will of the majority, he swears to "protect and defend the constitution" which basically means he's ethically bound to ignore the majority if their wishes are counter to the rules of governance. Often this becomes a gray area. My comment about Blair was that it's refreshing to see a politician act on conviction as opposed to what might get him elected.
|
|
#23
12-19-2004, 09:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time\'s Person of the Year
Well, it looks like they picked me.
While it is nice to be picked, there are others that would have been a better choice (see my post above). 
|
|
#24
12-19-2004, 04:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time\'s Person of the Year
George Bush. He is the person of the year. He is leader of the free world for another 4 years and giving it to anyone else would be a sham. Time almost always gives it to a president-elect or a president winning re-election.
|
|
#25
12-19-2004, 07:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time\'s Person of the Year
[ QUOTE ]
More like making us the second target of choice. [/ QUOTE ] A cowardly mantra Stu
|
|
#26
12-19-2004, 10:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time\'s Person of the Year
With this in mind, and considering that they chose both Hitler and Stalin, why wasn't UBL the person of the year in 2001?
|
|
#27
12-22-2004, 02:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time\'s Person of the Year
[ QUOTE ]
Naw, you guys aren't a spineless country like Spain. I think England is right behind the U.S. as the least likely country to be attacked any time soon. [/ QUOTE ] Jesus!, Do you really believe that? So, Tonga or the Mauricio Islands are most likely to be attacked than the US
|
|
#28
12-22-2004, 02:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time\'s Person of the Year
[ QUOTE ]
With this in mind, and considering that they chose both Hitler and Stalin, why wasn't UBL the person of the year in 2001? [/ QUOTE ] Because they are in the business of selling magazines
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
