Is it ever okay for your leaders to lie to you if they genuinely believe it is in the best interest of the country?

Personally, I'm okay with that, even if it turns out to be a colossal mistake. All I ask is that smart people did their best to get it right. Hey, no one is perfect.

That's why I can't generate any genuine anger toward our current bumbling government despite the fact they killed hundreds of thousands of people, steered the economy into a ravine, and ruined two hundred years of International good will. I actually think they were trying to do the right thing as they saw it. And if they weren't smart enough, the voters have to be blamed for that. Our politicians didn't get any dumber after being elected. We knew what we were getting.

I don't think I'm alone in my opinion. Otherwise we'd be in the middle of the impeachment process.

(Sorry about the line spacing. The blog interface is random today.)

Rank Up Rank Down Votes:  +6
  • Print
  • Share


Sort By:
Jun 18, 2008
I reject the fallacy that they're my leaders.
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Jun 14, 2008
I agree that Bush and company were probably trying to do the right thing, as they saw it.

However, getting elected isn't an endorsement to hijack the country and whatever you want for four years. Sure, we expect our leaders to make day-to-day decisions based upon their judgement and principles, but if your policies go against the will of the people over the long run, and you can't truthfully sell what you're doing, you owe it to the people to change direction.

That's called leadership, something we haven't seen for a long time.
Jun 13, 2008
oh yeh, and just wait until you see what John and I have planned for the next 8 years. Just thinking about it makes my leg start to tingle.
Jun 13, 2008
It's all true. All of it.

It has all worked out just as George, Karl and I envisioned it would:

Plan: Over throw Sadam Hussein, establish democracy in the middle east, drain the swamp, and then strut off into the sunset high-fiving ourselves: "Did we kick some serious fanatical, jihadi butt or what".

Result: Mission accomplished.

Plan: On the side, Enrich all of our oil buddys so that when we got to the other side of that sunset, we could retire rich beyond our wildest imaginations.

Result: Ka-ching.

Plan: Drive the Democrats stark raving mad. When faced with a choice between rabid looneys and evil geniuses, we were sure the Americans would go for the geniuses and thus we could be assured of Republican dominance of government for the next hundred years.

Result: They reelected us didn't they?

It's not easy being an evil genius, but it sure is rewarding.
Jun 13, 2008
You should have watched Letterman last night Scott. He got it right. Bush and co. just wanted to make money for the oil companies and Haliburton. They knew exactly what they where doing. They just did not care about the country.

LETTERMAN: My feeling about Cheney–and also Bush, but especially Cheney—is he just couldn’t care less about Americans. And that the same is true of George Bush. And all they really want to do is somehow kiss up to the oil people so they can get some great annuity when they’re out of office. “There you go, Dick, nice job. There’s a couple of billion for your troubles.” I mean, he pretty much put Halliburton in business, and the outsourcing of the military resources to private mercenary groups, and so forth. Is there any humanity in either of these guys?

/btw please enable some basic html in the comments
+4 Rank Up Rank Down
Jun 13, 2008
The republican party is controlled by big guns and big oil. They provide the party with the presidency in return for a few wars, to let the stocks rise. Your sons are killed for profit.

Of course they knew what would happen. It's what's always happens.

Countries like Iraq and Afghanistan have always been collossal messes. Afghanistan is just a huge drug operation. That's not even a secret. You can't build anything there because it's just sand and rocks.

It's funny that the US goes to war because of weapons of mass destruction, but refuses to sign a treaty banning cluster bombs. Your OWN weapons of mass destruction are just good for business, right?

Oh and of course, sometimes you show a (very much controlled by the army's marketing department) picture of a couple of kids bright and smiling because of a school being built. Otherwise the people get suspicious.

AND they wanted a good place to invade Iran from. Afghanistan and Iraq, perfect. Not to mention Russia and control of the middle east.

It was never about bringing democracy to the people. Why is the US not in Myanmar? Or any of those other places wrecked by corrupt government? A: no money, no strategic gain.

And of course, when people DO find out, you just say: oops, honest mistake, my bad.

And maybe foolish cartoonists will forgive you.
-2 Rank Up Rank Down
Jun 13, 2008
[I actually think they were trying to do the right thing as they saw it.]

That is astounding. It's like an intelligent person saying he is religious. It cannot be explained rationally.
Jun 13, 2008
No Scott, I'm not OK with the lying.

I am OK with people making HONEST mistakes, and I do agree with you that the current administration made several honest ones. It was not hard to convince themselves that Saddam's overthrow would be welcome by the majority of the people. And it was truthfully hard to predict that Saddam was the only thing keeping the ethnic groups from going after each other. I'll even give them the benefit of the doubt on the WMD thing, because Saddam WAS acting like he had them; ACTING - so he wouldn't be invaded.

But I despise dishonesty. "Invasion is our last resort" was a lie - invasion was the first resort. The UN inspection, while slow, was working. And take an idea that you had in a blog a few weeks ago. If instead of spending billions on an invasion, we were to offer Saddam 1 Billion dollars to him and his sons (and a guarentee of imunity) to peacefully leave Iraq with a democratic transition plan, how much better off EVERYONE would have been. Our economy, our soldiers, the Iraqi people, even Saddam. I thought of it before the war, and I gotta beleive that there are people smarter than you and me in the adminstration.

The reason that I so depise dishonesty is that it is a "character issue". I want our leaders to have the integrity to be able to say, to themselves and the People, "I know that I'm not the smartest, the cleverest, or even the most charismatic. But I will always be upfront with you as to my reasons, and I trust you to know that reasonable people will sometines disagree." A person, a government, with that attitude can, in my book, do no wrong, even if they make mistakes.

But I see very little of that character. The reason that we're not in the middle of impeachment hearings is that most of congress recognizes, "There, but for the grace of God, go I."
Jun 13, 2008
fiveashes - Set the dropdown boxes just below the post to sort by votes in a descending order. Then you will indeed see the best ones bubble to the top.
Jun 13, 2008
"..two hundred years of International good will."

That does it. Bush regime has replaced Scott with an impostor who tries to manipulate Dilbert fans. I've com to expect cluelessnes from Mr Adams about things concerning science and engineering, but not so blatantly about history.
Jun 13, 2008
Talking of democracy Scott, what's the point in rating comments so 'they bubble to the top' when that clearly doesn't happen.

It's like my vote doesn't count at all because the system will just do what it wants anyway...
Jun 12, 2008
"Personally, I'm okay with that," - maybe because you did not suffer as much as mothers who lost their children in the war, or did not lose two limbs in the bombing in Iraq.
Jun 12, 2008
200 years of international goodwill? Iceland maybe. The US, well, you might want to watch this:

US Military aggression 1890 - 2008
Jun 12, 2008
The thing that really amazes me is that you guys managed re-elect the guy. That just blows my mind...

Joe (from Norway)
-1 Rank Up Rank Down
Jun 12, 2008
It's not just about the lies...


+6 Rank Up Rank Down
Jun 12, 2008
I enjoy your blog entries, but the responses are priceless. Do real people write these, or have you created a "Random Republican Rant Response" generator? I always get a laugh from their assumptions and attacks, but the main reason I suspect a software program is because when reading some of these responses, it's difficult to see where they found the statements they are so vigorously attacking.

Some remind me very much language translation programs which often provide hilarious results. Hilarious as they are, these comments are either the result of faulty programs or faulty logic by real people. If it's really a program, I do need to congratulate you - the arrogance was a nice touch.
+2 Rank Up Rank Down
Jun 12, 2008
Why do you keep assuming that we Elected our government? The rest of the world snickers when they refer to Bush and his not actually having been elected, including the BBC World and DW-TV newscasters.
Jun 12, 2008
Part of it is that a large portion of the bad things you hear about Bush and his administration are Democrat and mainstream press hyperbole.
Jun 12, 2008
Oh, bull.

You didn't mind any of this when Clinton was in office. He, too, was for the war, as was his wife. He was the one who started redaction, not Bush. His Echelon program, which spied on just about everyone, and his warrantless physical searches of suspected terrorists were just fine with you and the NYT; but Bush's foreign electronic surveillance made you come unglued.

You may not vote, but that doesn't make you any less a partisan. If a Democrat were in the White House now, and had done exactly the same things following 9/11 (which he probably would have), you'd be just fine with it.

When you write pablum like this, I'm sure all your liberal buddies tell you how smart you are, so I guess that makes you feel justified in your selective ignorance. But you're as transparent as a pane of glass.

Give me a break.

+4 Rank Up Rank Down
Jun 12, 2008
Ok. Enough. I'm sick of two glaring issues with the new website. 1) The retarded flash module around the comic. It's to slow. I open the page, the comic shows underneath the flash image then after the amount of time it takes me to read 2 panels, the comic vanishes and I have to wait 30 seconds to a minute for the damn thing to reappear. how long has it been since the site launched, and this is still a problem!?! 2) The login system sucks. I constantly get logged out when trying to do mashups and I am never logged in the next day when I come back. What the hell is the remember me function for? Thousands of websites get this right, why not your web site creators???
Get the new Dilbert app!
Old Dilbert Blog