It's like giving Obama the Nobel Peace Prize before he'd accomplished anything, and ultimately his only lasting claim on the international stage is he got Bin Laden.

The award is a lot less about Greta and more about what Time is trying to signal by choosing her.  Could have gone to David Hoge, but he just doesn't have Greta's acting chops!

The intent behind making her a spokesperson is to squash debate - you're going to dismiss a woman?  How about a teenage girl?   But, LOL, Trump don't give a shit.  Based on all the memes I've seen floating around, it seems like most people's response is "I don't need this ignorant teenager lecturing me".

I'm sorry to repeat myself from another thread, but conservatives complaining about this topic has given it exponentially more attention than it would otherwise have gotten.  I defy 99% of the population to even name the last few "Time Person of the Years".  Time magazine is supposed to be a dying rag. So why pump it up by giving 2 poops about picking this girl?  And then of course the friggin President of the United States determines that he too needs to get involved.  

Conservatives think the mainstream media is liberally biased.  WE GET IT.  You've made the same point for 30 years, but still seem to feel it necessary to point out every single last example on a day-to-day basis.  

Her message REALLY enrages sensitive repubs. There’s your answer. This isn’t complicated.

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

I'm sorry to repeat myself from another thread, but conservatives complaining about this topic has given it exponentially more attention than it would otherwise have gotten.

That's the point of giving her the award.  And it's not even about Conservatives, it's so people go "who the hell is that", and look it up and make the connection to Climate Change.  Essentially marketing for the cause of the moment.

Other times it goes to a political leader dominating the headlines.   I think most Presidents have won at least once, and I think people like Stalin and Putin have also won.

I disagree with the Time’s choice. 
 

BTW, Hitler also got this award in 1938. 

posted by BRF

I disagree with the Time’s choice. 

She did kind of dominate the news cycle for the better part of a month.

But it's the fact that she's a manufactured celebrity to promote hysteria that turns most people off.

Regardless of the Times thing, and oh conservatives hate lit blah blah, there are people on the left who worship this girl. She’s literally mentally unstable, and autistic, and is being brainwashed from her parents. Yet all over my shitty social media there are people heralding her as being some climate change genius. That’s what annoys me is that our country is so full of morons, people actually think she should be newsworthy. 

posted by gut

She did kind of dominate the news cycle for the better part of a month.

But it's the fact that she's a manufactured celebrity to promote hysteria that turns most people off.

If dominating the news cycle is the criteria then Jeffery Epstein should have got it

posted by iclfan2

Regardless of the Times thing, and oh conservatives hate lit blah blah, there are people on the left who worship this girl. She’s literally mentally unstable, and autistic, and is being brainwashed from her parents. Yet all over my shitty social media there are people heralding her as being some climate change genius. That’s what annoys me is that our country is so full of morons, people actually think she should be newsworthy. 

It is the conservative media / talk show circuit that gives this whole thing the momentum it has.  People would not sit up and take notice just because Time named her person of the year.  The vast majority don't read and pay any attention to Time magazine.  It's the same predictable conservative commentators that give this thing 99% of the attention it is getting.  It's manufactured outrage.  Nothing more.

Not sure what autism has to do with it.  

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

It is the conservative media / talk show circuit that gives this whole thing the momentum it has.  People would not sit up and take notice just because Time named her person of the year.  The vast majority don't read and pay any attention to Time magazine.  It's the same predictable conservative commentators that give this thing 99% of the attention it is getting.  It's manufactured outrage.  Nothing more.

 

Not sure what autism has to do with it.  

That’s ridiculous. Before the Time thing she was being praised all over the shitty media and social media. The left has this weird obsession with making dumb teens matter more than they do. The autistic thing is that she has asbergers and has been brainwashed by her parents bc she doesn’t know any better. It’s actually really sad that her life is going to be shit once people stop caring about her. 

Why is her life going to be shit?

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

I'm sorry to repeat myself from another thread, but conservatives complaining about this topic has given it exponentially more attention than it would otherwise have gotten.  I defy 99% of the population to even name the last few "Time Person of the Years".  Time magazine is supposed to be a dying rag. So why pump it up by giving 2 poops about picking this girl?  And then of course the friggin President of the United States determines that he too needs to get involved.  

Conservatives think the mainstream media is liberally biased.  WE GET IT.  You've made the same point for 30 years, but still seem to feel it necessary to point out every single last example on a day-to-day basis.  

I'm not really upset or offended by her getting it.  I don't care that much, and as you said in the previous iteration of this reply, I couldn't name any of the last five Time Magazine Person of the Year winners.

My question really doesn't just have to do with her winning the award.  It's more about her popularity overall.  There are people calling her a hero, a brave young woman, a leader, etc.

Then, there are people calling her spoiled, vile, entitled, etc.

One side wants to hand her the nation's car keys.  The other wants to lock her in the trunk.

I'm curious where the justification is for either position.  By what criteria are people calling her vile, brave, heroic, or spoiled?
 

posted by Automatik

Her message REALLY enrages sensitive repubs. There’s your answer. This isn’t complicated.

I'm not just talking about Republicans, though.  She's literally being referred to as brave and heroic by supporters.  I'm curious why that's happening as well.
 

posted by BRF

I disagree with the Time’s choice.

I honestly DGAF about Time Magazine, so I'm mostly apathetic about their choice.

posted by Automatik

Why is her life going to be shit?

Because she doesn’t even have a high school education. What is she gonna do when the left throws her aside for the next hot thing? She has no idea how to cope with real life. She lives in a leftist bubble with no actual facts, just emotions, to prove her point. 

posted by iclfan2

Because she doesn’t even have a high school education. What is she gonna do when the left throws her aside for the next hot thing? She has no idea how to cope with real life. She lives in a leftist bubble with no actual facts, just emotions, to prove her point. 

Don't kid yourself.  She's already made more money than you and I will in our entire lives, combined.

Of course, her parents will probably steal all that money.  It will perhaps be ironic that "climate change" actually does ruin her life.

I really don't know what is funnier: that a weird kid won Person of the Year for blurting out talking points or that an alleged adult world leader ranted on social media about a weird kid winning Person of the Year.

posted by Heretic

I really don't know what is funnier: that a weird kid won Person of the Year for blurting out talking points or that an alleged adult world leader ranted on social media about a weird kid winning Person of the Year.

It's really quite fascinating.  The Left will bait Trump.  Then Trump responds by trolling them.  And then the Left has a meltdown.

posted by gut

It's really quite fascinating.  The Left will bait Trump.  Then Trump responds by trolling them.  And then the Left has a meltdown.

There are meltdowns on both sides as always.  TDS on the left and the perpetual outrage about liberals on the right. 

posted by Heretic

I really don't know what is funnier: that a weird kid won Person of the Year for blurting out talking points or that an alleged adult world leader ranted on social media about a weird kid winning Person of the Year.

Right???  It's fucking mind-blowing.
 

posted by gut

It's really quite fascinating.  The Left will bait Trump.  Then Trump responds by trolling them.  And then the Left has a meltdown.

This didn't feel like a troll, though.  Frankly, her response to his tweet was more of a troll, but that's one thing I'd probably give a 16-year-old the edge on in general, anyway.
 

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

There are meltdowns on both sides as always.  TDS on the left and the perpetual outrage about liberals on the right.

And somehow, when an under-educated (speaking literally, since she's not attending school anymore) teen sides one way and is given a pulpit to do it, everyone suddenly treats her like a major player in the political arena.

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

There are meltdowns on both sides as always.  TDS on the left and the perpetual outrage about liberals on the right.

I've not heard of panic and anxiety attacks, or seeking pyschiatric treatment, for anyone due to outrage about liberals.

posted by O-Trap

And somehow, when an under-educated (speaking literally, since she's not attending school anymore) teen sides one way and is given a pulpit to do it, everyone suddenly treats her like a major player in the political arena.

It's funny how everyone mostly ignores she clearly didn't write that speech....Kind of ruins the authenticity when she's coached to read a speech some adults wrote.

posted by gut

I've not heard of panic and anxiety attacks, or seeking pyschiatric treatment, for anyone due to outrage about liberals.

Although one could say that Quaker probably should seek some sort of treatment.

First world problems

This thread went off the rails

posted by gut

 

It's funny how everyone mostly ignores she clearly didn't write that speech....Kind of ruins the authenticity when she's coached to read a speech some adults wrote.

But even if she had, there was nothing profound or compelling about it.

posted by Heretic

Although one could say that Quaker probably should seek some sort of treatment.

LOL

posted by Spock

This thread went off the rails

Not really.

Pretty awesome where she basically threatened the non-believers with a firing squad lol.