# Time magazine top 100 influential people of the year



## Bgriffin856 (Nov 13, 2013)

And they wonder why this country and the world is going to hell in handbasket

http://time100.time.com/2013/04/18/time-100/slide/all/


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Bgriffin856 said:


> And they wonder why this country and the world is going to hell in handbasket
> 
> http://time100.time.com/2013/04/18/time-100/slide/all/


No kidding, loosing faith in Time. Wonder if George Soros owns em now.


----------



## FarmerCline (Oct 12, 2011)

I wonder what kind of dope who ever came up with that list was taking.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Time is like the rest of the liberal media....trying to form opinion for those who cannot think for themselves....which btw is a very large segment of this country. Best thing to do is not read any form of Time....especially the online versions as your visits to their sites are captured and shown to potential advertisers as to the viewership they produce. If one must read something in Time, pick up the edition in the Dr. office or somewhere where your support will not be recorded like it will be online or at the cash register.

Regards, Mike


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Scariest part of the whole "Time" thing is they have a magazine called "Time for kids" which is proudly displayed in the local schools. 
I picked it up once while at the school and its just cover to cover pro-Obama liberalism, global warming, coal/oil is bad, political correctness, reverse discrimination, etc. 
teachers read the articles aloud.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

I see some non liberal folks on that list too to be fair.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

Here you are folks. We all have a mental disability. http://themindunleashed.org/2013/11/nonconformity-and-freethinking-now.html


----------



## barnrope (Mar 22, 2010)

I must be pretty uneducated and under influenced. I counted 14 names on the list I had heard of before. None have had any positive influence on me.


----------



## Grateful11 (Apr 5, 2009)

I'm with barnrope, I don't think there's even 14 on that list that I've ever heard of.


----------



## barnrope (Mar 22, 2010)

Wish I hadn't heard of the last names that started with O.


----------



## Mike120 (May 4, 2009)

I've heard of about 20% of them and and some are actually worthy of admiration for their accomplishments. Sadly our society has a weird fascination with "celebrities" who are, in reality, nothing more than entertainers (including politicians) who amuse us with either a performance or their stupidity. The media however loves them because it gives the "talking heads" something to prattle on about and it also provides "chewing gum" for the minds of the sheeple. For me, I stick with The Economist, the only publication I've found that consistently provides a decent global perspective on human endeavors.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

slowzuki said:


> I see some non liberal folks on that list too to be fair.


That is true zuki.....probably done so more out of the pretense of credibility....although I was stunned to see Wayne LaPierre on the list.

Regards, Mike


----------



## NewBerlinBaler (May 30, 2011)

From the comments I see above, It looks like most of you guys don't get it.

The only criteria TIME magazine uses for this list is *how much impact *a person made during that year.

Doesn't matter if the impact was good or bad.

Gary


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

NewBerlinBaler said:


> From the comments I see above, It looks like most of you guys don't get it.
> 
> The only criteria TIME magazine uses for this list is *how much impact *a person made during that year.
> 
> ...


I sure am glad that you "get it" for us Gary.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

Lol.....good call, maybe they should call it the "100 most impactful people of the year" then we could include terrorists in the list as well....


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Vol said:


> That is true zuki.....probably done so more out of the pretense of credibility....although I was stunned to see Wayne LaPierre on the list.
> Regards, Mike


Well,,,,it does say INFLUENTIAL, not LOVED.
But I do agree, they have to throw a few token non liberals on there just to get a little credibility.


----------



## 8350HiTech (Jul 26, 2013)

somedevildawg said:


> Lol.....good call, maybe they should call it the "100 most impactful people of the year" then we could include terrorists in the list as well....


They've done that already. Osama bin laden was essentially the "person of the year" in 2001 even though they put Giuliani on the cover. Prior unsavory characters included Hitler, Stalin, Krushchev, and Ayatollah Khomeini. Nobody ever said these things were always people to respect.


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

8350HiTech said:


> They've done that already. Osama bin laden was essentially the "person of the year" in 2001 even though they put Giuliani on the cover. Prior unsavory characters included Hitler, Stalin, Krushchev, and Ayatollah Khomeini. Nobody ever said these things were always people to respect.


And yet another reason why I quit reading Time some 30 years ago, I have better things to do with my TIME....maybe someone should have the most 100 un-influential mags of the year, they would be in the top ten, the likes of the national inquirer, star, and hustler might not even make that list....


----------



## panhandle9400 (Jan 17, 2010)

Time is a liberal rag just as the huffington post is. Liberalism is a mental disorder.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Higher taxation and burdensome, intrusive regulation is the backbone of liberalism and were under their control. 1/10 of 1% growth in GDP in first quarter of this year. 
Pathetic, but sadly, the current administration actually wants it this way. 
All they, even Obama, want to talk about is Donald sterling or old plantation racism. Meanwhile, people are losing their life's savings and taxes, food and energy prices, health care are going up dramatically. It's because they have no way of helping the American economy while we get blown away by China, a communist country who's average worker still earns less than $2/ day.

Sorry for the rant.


----------

