Time has named Rudy Giuliani to be Man … er, Person of the Year.
Now, it’s their magazine, and they can do whatever they want. But Rudy doesn’t meet their stated criteria. It’s supposed to be the person who had “greatest impact, for good or ill” during the year. Rudy may be the “most admired man” in some quarters, but his impact on events was, frankly, trivial compared to many others.
Some folks have claimed that Time chickened out, not wanting to name Osama bin Laden as PoY. But bin Laden isn’t the best choice, either.
It’s George Dubya Bush.
Bin Laden had a tremendous impact, no doubt, even though it’s unclear how directly or indirectly he’s been manipulating the Al Qa’eda network, etc.
But it was Dubya’s response to 9-11, one part President, one part Dictator (in the classic, Roman sense), one part Wrath of God, that set the tone for the US, and the World, post-9-11. He’s established more of a New World Order than his dad ever did. He and his appointees have had more of an impact on domestic politics and civil liberties than anyone else of late. Even before 9-11, a new President always has had a broad influence over the nature of events. Bush, thrown into the deep end of the pool by bin Laden, has put his stamp on this year, on the US, and on the world. His reaction, over the past months, outweighted bin Laden’s triggering action.
But I don’t think the Time editors wanted to give it to him. Partly it’s because he won last year (though I thought that was wildly premature). Partly I think it was politics.
I’m not a big Bush fan, by any means. But by the criteria, the award should have been his.
(I’m not much of a Giuliani fan. I think he handled post-9-11 extremely well, even heroically. The news clips I saw of him speaking were moving and inspiring. I also think he’s been a pig in his private life, and if he does move on to the national political scene, I hope that all of those folks who were spewing such venom over Clinton’s peccadillos choke over having to swallow Rudy’s.)