Letters

Person of the Year
At first I was appalled by your choice for Person of the Year [Dec. 27-Jan. 3]. But then I remembered your criterion: the person who most affected the news and our lives, for good or for ill. I can't think of anyone in my lifetime who has affected more people's lives for ill than George W. Bush.
Glenn Boylan
Alpharetta, Georgia, U.S.

Bush's determination and steadfast personality are what makes this President special. There is no pretense or sophistication about him. He is authentic.
Juana Moreau
Marrero, Louisiana, U.S.

President Bush is undoubtedly the newsmaker of the year. Is he, however, a "revolutionary"? In your article, the Bush who no longer needs to win an election came across as a pugnacious thug, his swaggering, loves-to-be-hated style more brash than visionary. TIME said he was a "punk at heart" and recalled his college days of wearing cowboy boots and a bomber jacket on campus during Vietnam War protests. Was he an outsider then, as you suggest, or was he then—and is he now—the ultimate insider, a protected son of wealth and power who has little fear of what frightens ordinary people? You quoted him as saying, "I've got all the power I need." Yes, God help us all, he does.
Jan Hamilton Powell
Chattanooga, Tennessee, U.S.

I wholeheartedly agree with TIME's choice of Bush. Dubya's footprints have been large; it is a pity they have mostly been going backward. The President is no revolutionary but a reactionary pushing against the progressive tide. Americans feel poorer, less safe and less free than four years ago. Despite a narrow election victory in threatening times, he tells himself he has a mandate to shake things up. Look out, America. Look out, world!
Jeff Bennetzen
Bogart, Georgia, U.S.

Bush has made some hard choices during his four years, some of the toughest a President has had to make. He sticks to his guns and does not retreat. Twenty or 30 years from now, he will be described as a man of vision and courage. He stands up for what he believes is right and does not ask the world for its opinion.
Mark King
Lyons, Nebraska, U.S.

You chose President Bush for "sticking to his guns." The problem is, he isn't the one manning those guns. It's the unfortunate U.S. troops in Iraq, many of them reservists and National Guard members, who are fighting and dying in Bush's ill-conceived war.
David Sheffield
Los Angeles

The President has given back to Americans something we have longed for and needed for a long time: hope for a moral and strong U.S.
Nancy Jackson
Blossom, Texas, U.S.

Many of the gravest errors in human history were made by leaders who stuck to their guns. We don't need guns. We need compassion and moral strength.
Jon Sherman
Chicago

Foreign Feedback
I appreciate your choice of President Bush as Person of the Year for 2004 [Dec. 27-Jan. 3]. I would add the following reason to those you stated: his farsighted vision. Since 9/11, Bush has been the only world leader with a clear plan for how to face, combat and eventually defeat terrorism. His critics have so far only demonized him but never offered any serious alternative strategies for winning or even waging the war on terrorism. Bush has a great chance in his second term to continue to implement his plans for a final victory in this war. In 10 to 15 years, history will regard him as the person who made the first fundamental contribution to the defeat of terrorism.
Fabrizio Zanello
Genoa, Italy

The Person of the Year should be someone who has been instrumental in shaping events. Though President Bush sees himself as the leader of the democratic world and the fight against terrorists, his decisions since 9/11 have been reactive rather than proactive. It pains me greatly, therefore, to nominate two people who have really been calling the shots: Osama bin Laden and insurgent leader Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi. Both seem to understand that power comes through the hearts and minds of the people.
Stanley J. Courtney
Shrewsbury, England

Bush is not "reframing reality to match his design," as you claimed. He is facing the reality of the worldwide threat from militant Islam, and he and the coalition forces are taking steps to counter it. He is not, as you said, "gambling his fortunes—and America's—on his faith in the power of leadership." He is demonstrating leadership in a world of craven politicians and fearful people. We Africans know something of terrorist oppression from personal experience and have not been taken in by the propaganda of the radical Islamists. Viva the U.S.!
Tapumaneyi Jongwe
Johannesburg

I presume that you chose Bush more for his negative achievements—of which there are many—than for anything constructive. In fact, I can't think of anything positive he has done, except to deceive the American people into voting him into a second term, if that can be regarded as positive. No one likes to think that the population of the U.S. is completely stupid, but if voters supported Bush and his cronies, fully convinced that they were the right choice, then Americans got what they deserve. TIME should have selected the American people as Fools of the Year. Pity the rest of the world. But we don't count, do we?
Susan Hafner
Balsthal, Switzerland

My reaction to your choice of President Bush as Person of the Year went from revulsion to amazement to the realization that there was no alternative. This man has shaped the world for four years and—for better or worse—will be doing so for another four, but who knows to what end? We can only remain on edge to discover, as his second term unfolds, what surprises Bush has in store for us. It is quite frightening.
Michael Madison
Opio, France

How Bush could be named Person of the Year is beyond me. The man is an intellectual midget. His presidency has been marked by the full-scale manipulation of reality at all levels. The person responsible for that is political operative Rove, not Bush, who is a bumbling spokesman. To fill the gap left by the disappearance of the Soviet Union, the Administration created a new enemy, terrorism. But achieving that goal has only strengthened U.S. adversaries, especially al-Qaeda. Eventually, reality will come back with a vengeance, but it is the successors to the Bush Administration who will have to deal with it.
Peter Van Roy
Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

The Rainbow Cabinet
Columnist Joe Klein's "The Benetton-Ad Presidency" discussed the diversity of President Bush's choices for Cabinet posts [Dec. 27-Jan. 3]. But diversity is not merely a difference of color or ethnicity but also a divergence of perspective, opinion and experience. If the President is really interested in diversity, he will do well to name a Cabinet that sees things differently, challenges convention and perhaps even dares to disagree, instead of simply achieving a comfort level that feels good. That's true diversity.
Terrence D. Samuel Jr.
Gates, Oregon, U.S.

Bush's cabinet looks like a rainbow and appears to be beyond reproach. But that's the trick. To judge this Administration, you must look deeper into the policies being enacted and their impact on the various segments of our society. You can't judge a book by its cover.
Olivia Koppell
New York City

Some Other Ideas
A number of our readers had their own thoughts about whom they would have selected as TIME's Person of the Year. From Barcelona came this suggestion: "A better choice would have been a collage or mosaic showing the faces of the brave soldiers and innocent victims who have perished in the Iraqi conflict." A reader from the United Arab Emirates complained, "It bothers me that almost every U.S. President is named at least once as the Person of the Year. HOW ABOUT BEING MORE CREATIVE IN YOUR SELECTION?" And a Pennsylvanian asked, "How could you miss the obvious? The choice should have been a U.S. soldier and an Iraqi citizen." The person who garnered the largest number of nominations, however, was not an American or a member of the armed forces but Ukraine's President-elect, Viktor Yushchenko. As one letter writer put it, "Yushchenko is a prime example of someone who is truly fighting for democracy."