Naturally, conservatives are more than willing to complain about things they are left out of, regardless if their arguments have merit or not.
...color me underwhelmed by their choice this year of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.
Is there more to this story? Well … no. Their in-depth profile of Zuckerberg shows that he has a “weird calm,” and their in-depth interviews with people who depend on Zuckerberg for a paycheck finds that they “really like him.” What a shock! Truly, this is the most potent force of the year.
Apparently, Time didn’t know that Facebook launched in February 2004, and had achieved the status of most trafficked social network by the end of 2008. If the issue was impact, it seems as though Time is two years too late in awarding this.
Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange cleaned up in the online voting but even far left TIME Magazine couldn’t quite give him the award.
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg won the Person of the Year award instead.
The Tea Party Nation did not make the list even though they were able to stop the onslaught of socialism dead in its tracks this year with the historic wave election in November.
What Ed Morrissey and Gateway Pundit - whom the quotes above belong to respectively - don't seem to understand that they could easily say that Sarah Palin is clearly the one responsible for Zuckerberg's win. Why didn't they opt for that avenue I can only speculate, but that's precisely how transparently laughable their sort of rationalizations are when they want to feel intellectually and morally superior to others.
The real reason that Zuckerberg won is likely two-fold:
1 - Time didn't want to give the "honor" to Assange simply because they didn't want to have to deal with what would quite literally be wall to wall coverage and smearing of them from conservative talk radio and Fox"News". For that, I would call them cowards and hardly a "far left rag", like they are so often called. If they were even fractionally as "liberally biased" as conservatives claim they are, they would have given it to George Soros, Keith Olbermann, or Stewart/Colbert.
2 - It is possible that Time was hoping that Sarah Palin and her mouth agape followers would latch onto this story and show how they helped elevate internet sites like Facebook to such prestigious status and allow someone as young and Zuckerberg to finally achieve that all to often unattainable "American Dream". Then again, that option is predicated on the fact that Palin and her media masters would have in all likelihood say something "nice" about Time. Yeah, that's not going to happen.
Regardless of whom on the Right says that this is a poor choice, it does make small amount of sense, seeing as how Facebook is now one of the "go to" social networking sites for socio-political action. Congrats to Mark on his win.
Now, let's sit back and wait to see what Palin's ghostwriter has to say about this.