| Autor |
Mensagem |
Rato
Veterano |
# abr/10
O presidente Lula foi eleito o líder mais influente do mundo pela revista americana Time . O brasileiro é seguido pelo presidente da empresa de computadores Acer, J. T. Wang, o chefe do Estado-Maior dos Estados Unidos, almirante Mike Mullen, e o presidente americano, Barack Obama.
eita se o barba tá com moral
:)
:*
|
staind
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Quem diria...
|
staind
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Ele vai usar dessa popularidade pra eleger a Dilma de qualquer jeito.
|
GOREFESTA
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
He's the fucking man! [/obama]
Pra fechar o mandato!
|
Prof. Grosélio
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
staind
Ele vai usar dessa popularidade pra eleger a Dilma de qualquer jeito.
Mas como só com o voto dele ela não se elege....Sinto muito, mas ela está fora. Quem ganha é o ciro Gomes.
O lula é influente. Gosto dele.
|
wild.man
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Prof. Rosélio Araujo
Quem ganha é o ciro Gomes.
Meio complicado, ele tá fora. O partido dele tá apoiando a Dilma.
|
Simonetti
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Isto é a opinião de uma revista apenas... não é um consenso.
Embora pelo lado negro da força, eu não consigo imaginar hoje um lider mais influente do que Osama Bin Laden.
Uma palavra do Osama é capaz de fazer os EUA passar todo seu "budget" de saúde para os militares em meio segundo.
Lula viaja muito, mas parece que sem muito propósito. Ele faz muito para aparecer, mas sem resultados concretos.
O que está acontecendo com a política externa brasileira, sobretudo nos casos do Irã e antes da Bolívia e Venezuela, é uma vergonha para qualquer diplimata.
|
Prof. Grosélio
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Simonetti
Gostei de voce. Tem umas idéias meio que estranhas, mas me parece gente boa. Vamo toma umas por conta!!!!!
|
Fenrisulfr
Veterano |
# abr/10 · Editado por: Fenrisulfr
· votar
"Mas me diz uma coisa, compaera Dilma, esse Time ai eh di qual campeonato que eu num sei...eh time da Oropa???"
Lula sobre a Revista Time.
|
brunohardrocker
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Um dos maiores marketeiros que já passaram por aqui.
|
Fenrisulfr
Veterano |
# abr/10 · Editado por: Fenrisulfr
· votar
Edit.
|
GOREFESTA
Veterano |
# abr/10 · Editado por: GOREFESTA
· votar
Simonetti
Embora pelo lado negro da força, eu não consigo imaginar hoje um lider mais influente do que Osama Bin Laden.
Se for por esse lado, o ditador la da coreia do norte é foda de influente... basta ele anunciar algum teste nuclear e todo o mundo volta a atenção para ele. A Onu tenta conversa, os EUA ja partem para as retaliações, etc.
Isto é a opinião de uma revista apenas... não é um consenso.
Com certeza, sua opnião foi consultada? A minha tbm não!
Msm assim não deixa de ser bom para o Lula, além do mais revistas do tipo da Time são formadoras de opnião. Agora se isso é bom ou ruim...
|
Konrad
Veterano |
# abr/10 · Editado por: Konrad
· votar
Hitler, Putin e Stalin também já foram.
|
Prof. Grosélio
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Fenrisulfr
Bin Laden?
Eu acho o Bin Laden um cara muito humilde. Tem um jeitão de mineiro da roça. Gosto dele!
|
Konrad
Veterano |
# abr/10 · Editado por: Konrad
· votar
Charles Augustus Lindbergh
1928 Walter P. Chrysler
1929 Owen D. Young
1930 Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
1931 Pierre Laval
1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt
1933 Hugh Samuel Johnson
1934 Franklin Delano Roosevelt
1935 Haile Selassie
1936 Mrs. Wallis Warfield Simpson
1937 Generalissimo & Mme Chiang Kai-Shek
1938 Adolf Hitler
1939 Joseph Stalin
1940 Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill
1941 Franklin Delano Roosevelt
1942 Joseph Stalin
1943 George Catlett Marshall
1944 Dwight David Eisenhower
1945 Harry Truman
1946 James F. Byrnes
1947 George Catlett Marshall
1948 Harry Truman
1949 Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill
1950 American Fighting-Man
1951 Mohammed Mossadegh
1952 Elizabeth II
1953 Konrad Adenauer
1954 John Foster Dulles
1955 Harlow Herbert Curtice
1956 Hungarian Freedom Fighter
1957 Nikita Krushchev
1958 Charles De Gaulle
1959 Dwight David Eisenhower
1960 U.S. Scientists
1961 John Fitzgerald Kennedy
1962 Pope John XXIII
1963 Martin Luther King Jr.
1964 Lyndon B. Johnson
1965 General William Childs Westmoreland
1966 Twenty-Five and Under
1967 Lyndon B. Johnson
1968 Astronauts Anders, Borman and Lovell
1969 The Middle Americans
1970 Willy Brandt
1971 Richard Milhous Nixon
1972 Nixon and Kissinger
1973 John J. Sirica
1974 King Faisal
1975 American Women
1976 Jimmy Carter
1977 Anwar Sadat
1978 Teng Hsiao-P'ing
1979 Ayatullah Khomeini
1980 Ronald Reagan
1981 Lech Walesa
1982 The Computer
1983 Ronald Reagan & Yuri Andropov
1984 Peter Ueberroth
1985 Deng Xiaoping
1986 Corazon Aquino
1987 Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev
1988 Endangered Earth
1989 Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev
1990 The Two George Bushes
1991 Ted Turner
1992 Bill Clinton
1993 The Peacemakers
1994 Pope John Paul II
1995 Newt Gingrich
1996 Dr. David Ho
1997 Andy Grove
1998 Bill Clinton and Kenneth Starr
1999 Jeff Bezos
2000 George W. Bush
2001 Rudolph Giuliani
2002 The Whistleblowers
2003 The American Soldier
2004 George W. Bush
2005 Bill Gates, Melinda Gates, & Bono
2006 You
2007 Vladimir Putin
2008 Barack Obama
2009 Ben Bernanke
|
Fenrisulfr
Veterano |
# abr/10 · Editado por: Fenrisulfr
· votar
Adolf Hitler, Man of the Year 1938:
http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1939/1101390102_40 0.jpg
A Time de vez em quando faz umas cagadas dessas...
|
brunohardrocker
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Konrad
2006 You
Rá!
Sabia que não poderiam esquecer de mim!
|
Fenrisulfr
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
1973 John J. Siririca
huauhhuahuauhahuhauhuahuahuuha
|
Konrad
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
brunohardrocker
De nós, mano.
Apesar de tentarem me convencer de que o plural de you é "yous".... hehe
|
GOREFESTA
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
1982 The Computer
Esse é foda, sempre com opnioes embasadas e nunca erra, só da umas gaguejadas, nada demais
|
brunohardrocker
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Konrad
haha
Mas qual será o motivo?
Em 2006 o "povo" foi o maior influente? Oo
|
GOREFESTA
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
1937 Generalissimo & Mme Chiang Kai-Shek
pqp! hauhauahahuahuahuaa
|
-Dan
Veterano
 |
# abr/10
· votar
1975 American Women
Chei de graça essa revista
|
Konrad
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
brunohardrocker
aha
Mas qual será o motivo?
Em 2006 o "povo" foi o maior influente? Oo
Pela ascenção da internet, a velocidade da informação e da opinião.... acho que é por isso...
|
DarkMakerX
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
Todo mundo fala que o Lula é burro e ignorante. Se fosse mesmo, como ele chegou onde está? Niguém vê o trabalho que ele fez, o caminho que ele percorreu.
|
Kensei
Veterano |
# abr/10 · Editado por: Kensei
· votar
Apenas esclarecendo, Person of The Year é uma coisa (listagempostada pelo Konrad), Pessoas mais influentes é outra coisa. Lula na categoria de Líder e Lady Gaga de artistas
Lista completa
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva
By Michael Moore Thursday, Apr. 29, 2010
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1984685_198 4864,00.html#ixzz0mVfxswHa
When Brazilians first elected Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva President in 2002, the country's robber barons nervously checked the fuel gauges on their private jets. They had turned Brazil into one of the most inequitable places on earth, and now it looked like payback time. Lula, 64, was a genuine son of Latin America's working class — in fact, a founding member of the Workers' Party — who'd once been jailed for leading a strike.
By the time Lula finally won the presidency, after three failed attempts, he was a familiar figure in Brazilian national life. But what led him to politics in the first place? Was it his personal knowledge of how hard many Brazilians must work just to get by? Being forced to leave school after fifth grade to support his family? Working as a shoeshine boy? Losing part of a finger in a factory accident?
No, it was when, at age 25, he watched his wife Maria die during the eighth month of her pregnancy, along with their child, because they couldn't afford decent medical care.
There's a lesson here for the world's billionaires: let people have good health care, and they'll cause much less trouble for you.
And here's a lesson for the rest of us: the great irony of Lula's presidency — he was elected to a second term in 2006 and will serve through this year — is that even as he tries to propel Brazil into the First World with government social programs like Fome Zero (Zero Starvation), designed to end hunger, and with plans to improve the education available to members of Brazil's working class, the U.S. looks more like the old Third World every day.
What Lula wants for Brazil is what we used to call the American Dream. We in the U.S., by contrast, where the richest 1% now own more financial wealth than the bottom 95% combined, are living in a society that is fast becoming more like Brazil.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1984685_198 4864,00.html#ixzz0mVfoDGqT
|
Konrad
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
DarkMakerX
Ser influente não tem relação direta com ser inteligente ou honesto. Dá uma olhadinha na lista.
|
Fenrisulfr
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
DarkMakerX
Todo mundo fala que o Lula é burro e ignorante. Se fosse mesmo, como ele chegou onde está? Niguém vê o trabalho que ele fez, o caminho que ele percorreu.
Qual, o de amputar o proprio dedo e depois virar presidente do PT ???
|
-Dan
Veterano
|
# abr/10
· votar
DarkMakerX
Todo mundo fala que o Lula é burro e ignorante. Se fosse mesmo, como ele chegou onde está? Niguém vê o trabalho que ele fez, o caminho que ele percorreu.
Criticar o presidente é um habito eterno cultural brasileiro mesmo. Até meninos de 12 anos criticam. Se Jesus fosse o presidente, criticariam tb. Normal.
|
Kensei
Veterano |
# abr/10
· votar
brunohardrocker
YOU: não é o maior influente, mas sim personalidade do ano.
The "Great Man" theory of history is usually attributed to the Scottish philosopher Thomas Carlyle, who wrote that "the history of the world is but the biography of great men." He believed that it is the few, the powerful and the famous who shape our collective destiny as a species. That theory took a serious beating this year.
To be sure, there are individuals we could blame for the many painful and disturbing things that happened in 2006. The conflict in Iraq only got bloodier and more entrenched. A vicious skirmish erupted between Israel and Lebanon. A war dragged on in Sudan. A tin-pot dictator in North Korea got the Bomb, and the President of Iran wants to go nuclear too. Meanwhile nobody fixed global warming, and Sony didn't make enough PlayStation3s.
But look at 2006 through a different lens and you'll see another story, one that isn't about conflict or great men. It's a story about community and collaboration on a scale never seen before. It's about the cosmic compendium of knowledge Wikipedia and the million-channel people's network YouTube and the online metropolis MySpace. It's about the many wresting power from the few and helping one another for nothing and how that will not only change the world, but also change the way the world changes.
The tool that makes this possible is the World Wide Web. Not the Web that Tim Berners-Lee hacked together (15 years ago, according to Wikipedia) as a way for scientists to share research. It's not even the overhyped dotcom Web of the late 1990s. The new Web is a very different thing. It's a tool for bringing together the small contributions of millions of people and making them matter. Silicon Valley consultants call it Web 2.0, as if it were a new version of some old software. But it's really a revolution.
And we are so ready for it. We're ready to balance our diet of predigested news with raw feeds from Baghdad and Boston and Beijing. You can learn more about how Americans live just by looking at the backgrounds of YouTube videos—those rumpled bedrooms and toy-strewn basement rec rooms—than you could from 1,000 hours of network television.
And we didn't just watch, we also worked. Like crazy. We made Facebook profiles and Second Life avatars and reviewed books at Amazon and recorded podcasts. We blogged about our candidates losing and wrote songs about getting dumped. We camcordered bombing runs and built open-source software.
America loves its solitary geniuses—its Einsteins, its Edisons, its Jobses—but those lonely dreamers may have to learn to play with others. Car companies are running open design contests. Reuters is carrying blog postings alongside its regular news feed. Microsoft is working overtime to fend off user-created Linux. We're looking at an explosion of productivity and innovation, and it's just getting started, as millions of minds that would otherwise have drowned in obscurity get backhauled into the global intellectual economy.
Who are these people? Seriously, who actually sits down after a long day at work and says, I'm not going to watch Lost tonight. I'm going to turn on my computer and make a movie starring my pet iguana? I'm going to mash up 50 Cent's vocals with Queen's instrumentals? I'm going to blog about my state of mind or the state of the nation or the steak-frites at the new bistro down the street? Who has that time and that energy and that passion?
The answer is, you do. And for seizing the reins of the global media, for founding and framing the new digital democracy, for working for nothing and beating the pros at their own game, TIME's Person of the Year for 2006 is you.
Sure, it's a mistake to romanticize all this any more than is strictly necessary. Web 2.0 harnesses the stupidity of crowds as well as its wisdom. Some of the comments on YouTube make you weep for the future of humanity just for the spelling alone, never mind the obscenity and the naked hatred.
But that's what makes all this interesting. Web 2.0 is a massive social experiment, and like any experiment worth trying, it could fail. There's no road map for how an organism that's not a bacterium lives and works together on this planet in numbers in excess of 6 billion. But 2006 gave us some ideas. This is an opportunity to build a new kind of international understanding, not politician to politician, great man to great man, but citizen to citizen, person to person. It's a chance for people to look at a computer screen and really, genuinely wonder who's out there looking back at them. Go on. Tell us you're not just a little bit curious.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html#ixzz0 mVgpivDR
|