Dilbert on sanctimony in bailouts

posted at 10:42 am on February 25, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Via Instapundit, I couldn’t help but laugh at this — because if I didn’t laugh, I’d cry.  Dilbert usually sticks to corporate America for its lampooning, but with the line blurring between business and politics like never before, Scott Adams wields a mighty pen in highlighting the ridiculous sanctimony of Senators and Representatives complaining about private-jet use in the private sector:

I agree that having the three CEOs of the American automakers fly to DC to plead poverty is laughably bad optics.  If taxpayers bail out firms, in Detroit, Wall Street, or anywhere else, then that aid should come with some strings attached on how the money gets spent.  I don’t think block grants to Citibank are any more of a good idea than to Ford, or ACORN, for that matter.

However, before pillorying executives for private jet use (which does create jobs), perhaps our public servants should set the example first.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Love this.

ZJPolitical on February 25, 2009 at 10:44 AM

If only the CEOs took Dogbert’s lead and responded similarly…

Vashta.Nerada on February 25, 2009 at 10:47 AM

Glenn Reynolds would probably say:

HEH

originalpechanga on February 25, 2009 at 10:48 AM

Very funny. There is no one from the corporate world who will say this to their faces?

jencab on February 25, 2009 at 10:48 AM

Ed- IIRC Ford didn’t ask for a bailout .

Otherwise Dogbert for Treasury!

profitsbeard on February 25, 2009 at 10:48 AM

However, before pillorying executives for private jet use (which does create jobs), perhaps our public servants should set the example first.

How about including retirement and health care programs? No reason congresscritters shouldn’t enjoy the benefits of their own legislation.

a capella on February 25, 2009 at 10:48 AM

That cartoon sums up things in Washington perfectly. Both parties enjoy pointing out the others flaws and how evil they are while doing the exact same thing. I cannot stand how people who have the microphone, whether they are from politics or showbiz (especially showbiz), tell us chattering classes how to live while they do this sanctimonious crap.

txaggie on February 25, 2009 at 10:49 AM

I look forward to Dilbert every Sunday. I chuckle out loud every week. I also enjoy Over The Hedge and Tank Macnamara.

robblefarian on February 25, 2009 at 10:49 AM

Wow, imagine the response if CEOs had the pluck to respond that way. That would be awesome.

Marine_Bio on February 25, 2009 at 10:49 AM

However, before pillorying executives for private jet use (which does create jobs), perhaps our public servants should set the example first.

What public servants? These people have become for them, about them, at all times.

Having to watch that perma-grinning clownshoe Pelosi jump up every thirty seconds while Ogabe outlined his plan to shatter America made me realize yet again that the “servant” part of politics died long ago. Most of the pols would happily confine us all to cages if if meant they could keep their seats.

Bishop on February 25, 2009 at 10:50 AM

Why is the businessman depicted as a WHITE DOG?

Dogs are considered filthy animals in some cultures. What is the symbolism of the dog, and the white skin?

This kind of blatant racism deserves retribution. Prepare to die.

JiangxiDad on February 25, 2009 at 10:51 AM

Everyone should e-mail this to their senators and congressional reps. You want to know the real “tone” in America? Ask the people coming dow the street with the pitchforks and torches.

Dukehoopsfan on February 25, 2009 at 10:51 AM

This kind of blatant racism deserves retribution. Prepare to die.

JiangxiDad on February 25, 2009 at 10:51 AM

We will also need jihad breakout sessions, though.

Vashta.Nerada on February 25, 2009 at 10:53 AM

If only the CEOs took Dogbert’s lead and responded similarly…

Vashta.Nerada on February 25, 2009 at 10:47 AM

They’re begging for money they haven’t earned. It wouldn’t work coming from them.

Esthier on February 25, 2009 at 10:53 AM

If you remember Oliver North stood up to Congress when he testified. Congress expected him just to roll over and when he fought back they practically had to perform CPR on the poor befuddled fools.

Would love to see a repeat

LincolntheHun on February 25, 2009 at 10:54 AM

It wouldn’t work coming from them.

Esthier on February 25, 2009 at 10:53 AM

It would work if they pointed out that government intervention, like CAFE standards, put them in the position they find themselves in.

Vashta.Nerada on February 25, 2009 at 10:54 AM

Would be nice to see it happen this way but they all know this is just another act in the never ending show that is the Congress. Congress should write for SNL. Sadly, the laugh is on us.

hillbilly on February 25, 2009 at 10:55 AM

Beautiful.

Matticus Finch on February 25, 2009 at 10:56 AM

“Day by Day” is my favorite elixir in the morning. but, when I saw this in the paper this AM…..I had to smile.

MNDavenotPC on February 25, 2009 at 10:56 AM

Funny! haha

becki51758 on February 25, 2009 at 10:56 AM

I hate Madame Botox and her use of a private tax payed jet as much as the next person….but her getting PWNED by the Pope was AMAZING!!!!

id pay for more trips to Italy to have a round two…

alexraye on February 25, 2009 at 10:57 AM

It would work if they pointed out that government intervention, like CAFE standards, put them in the position they find themselves in.

Vashta.Nerada on February 25, 2009 at 10:54 AM

Yes, that could work but only for the companies that can say it was truly government intervention and not their own incompetence that brought them to Washington asking for money.

Esthier on February 25, 2009 at 10:58 AM

I think this was the red meat we were hoping for from Jindal last night.

on fire on February 25, 2009 at 10:58 AM

To market, to market, to buy a fat pig. Home again, home again, jiggety-jig.

To market, to market, to buy a fat hog. Home again, home again, jiggety-jog.

To market, to market, to buy a plum bun, Home again, home again, market is done.

maverick muse on February 25, 2009 at 11:00 AM

Would love to see a repeat

LincolntheHun on February 25, 2009 at 10:54 AM

Maybe Rush , when they implement the doctrine of fairness ( not to be mixed up with the fairness doctrine ).

the_nile on February 25, 2009 at 11:00 AM

You go Dogbert!

He must have taken lessons from Jim Calhoun.

http://pointofagun.blogspot.com/2009/02/why-cant-gop-answer-questions-like-this.html

PrincipledPilgrim on February 25, 2009 at 11:01 AM

Ayup, it’s going on my Facebook page when I get home from work today.

Bob's Kid on February 25, 2009 at 11:02 AM

I’d love it if someone would stand up and snarl back at the “Imperial” Senate.

Kinda hard to do though when you are there to beg for money.

wildcat84 on February 25, 2009 at 11:04 AM

I always wonder why people dragged in front of congress don’t just mock them and make them look like the fools they often are.

Grafted on February 25, 2009 at 11:06 AM

Dilbert for President.

AZCoyote on February 25, 2009 at 11:06 AM

Where the ‘typical white person’ only sees a turd, Dilbert’s heightened sense of smell tracks exactly who dumped and the ingredients of the dump.

The point of Socialism is to make all business Government Business.

maverick muse on February 25, 2009 at 11:06 AM

LOL!!!

Perfect.

Did he do one on Congress chewing out the banks for all that money they handed out without precondition and only then bitc#ed about how it was spent?

Yakko77 on February 25, 2009 at 11:06 AM

He must have taken lessons from Jim Calhoun.

http://pointofagun.blogspot.com/2009/02/why-cant-gop-answer-questions-like-this.html

PrincipledPilgrim on February 25, 2009 at 11:01 AM

Kick ass.

the_nile on February 25, 2009 at 11:07 AM

JiangxiDad on February 25, 2009 at 10:51 AM

On behalf of all dogs everywhere I demand an immediate apology from everybody or me an my pack will start howling incessantly out front of your homes and/or places of business!

TheBigOldDog on February 25, 2009 at 11:08 AM

*snort*

ladyingray on February 25, 2009 at 11:09 AM

I LOVE Dilbert. Dogbert actually.

The whole corporate jet thing… before long, the panel won’t be happy until some schlub shows up in a polyester suit and brown shoes.

Oink on February 25, 2009 at 11:10 AM

Love it!

Alana on February 25, 2009 at 11:11 AM

TheBigOldDog on February 25, 2009 at 11:08 AM

Since an apology wasn’t immediately forthcoming we now also demand marrow bones. Lots and lots of marrow bones!

TheBigOldDog on February 25, 2009 at 11:11 AM

On behalf of all dogs everywhere I demand an immediate apology from everybody or me an my pack will start howling incessantly out front of your homes and/or places of business!

TheBigOldDog on February 25, 2009 at 11:08 AM

Hoot!!!! Here boy! Catch this ACORN.

Oink on February 25, 2009 at 11:12 AM

Which of our elected criminals will be first to take umbrage at being called a “wool-coated glob of fat”?

whitetop on February 25, 2009 at 11:13 AM

Why that’s not very populist of Scott Adams.

BohicaTwentyTwo on February 25, 2009 at 11:15 AM

Hoot!!!! Here boy! Catch this ACORN.

Oink on February 25, 2009 at 11:12 AM

That’s it! We now want meat on the bones!

We can do this all day!

TheBigOldDog on February 25, 2009 at 11:16 AM

Here is the problem with Gov Jindal.

He is clearly inferior to obama in presentation and conveying doom and gloom by reading from a teleprompter.

Obama is as slick as they come reading from the teleprompter.

seven on February 25, 2009 at 11:20 AM

Is it just me or does the woman in green look like Maxine Waters?

Glenn Jericho on February 25, 2009 at 11:21 AM

If the dog was a monkey, the Dilbert cartoons would be banned in the new Obama “everything is racist” world.

albill on February 25, 2009 at 11:22 AM

I’m looking for stories on the cost of Obama’s trips since January 20. How much did it cost the taxpayers for him to fly to Virginia for the Democrats’ retreat? How much did it cost the taxpayers for him to make campaign speeches in Indiana, Florida, and Arizona? How much did it cost us for his Valentine’s dinner in Chicago?

How much are we paying to keep the oval office hot enough to grow orchids?

Dilbert and Dogbert need to lampoon the executive branch as much as the legislative branch of our government.

As with global warming–I’ll believe it is a crisis when the people talking about it live like it is a crisis.

Margee on February 25, 2009 at 11:23 AM

I say that we should start imputing income for the portion of the value of these junkets that are personal in nature.

Are Dems going to try to tell us that Pelosi was on U.S. business when she was in Rome. Doesn’t have to be exact. Get an independent agency to peg a state business-personal use percentage. And let’s see those receipts for meals and accomodations.

This goes for GOP and Dems alike.

BuckeyeSam on February 25, 2009 at 11:24 AM

I noticed that our helicopter-deprived Dear Leader had to throw the pathetic snark against business “excess” into his sermon speech last night.

The hypocrisy from the left knows no bounds.

Osama Obama sure as hell couldn’t win a debate with Dogbert. And, in fact, I suspect Dogbert comes closer to being Constitutionally eligible for the presidency than Octobama.

MrScribbler on February 25, 2009 at 11:26 AM

Margee:
Considering that when the president flies, he does so with a FLEET of aircraft, I would imagine the cost would be pretty high…..and something that the bureaucrats would tie themselves in knots trying to minimize.

The “carbon foot print” alone would probably be equivalent to to that of a couple thousand homes for one year.

GarandFan on February 25, 2009 at 11:29 AM

I read Dilbert every day, but I thought this was way too easy. Fish in a barrel. Half a million commenters at HotAir already made the same point.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on February 25, 2009 at 11:32 AM

Obama and the dimcrat congress have no intention of problem solving. They are now in the business of perception management. The sheeple’s perception of reality must be carefully crafted and managed, lest they raise their heads from the meadow and realize the smoke they’ve been smelling for these past few weeks is now the front of a wall of fire that is about to consume them all.

Every act of lunacy they commit has two objectives. Delay the inevitable, and transfer the last of the sheeple wealth and treasure into their hands.

That’s it.

KentAllard on February 25, 2009 at 11:35 AM

However, before pillorying executives for private jet use (which does create jobs), perhaps our public servants should set the example first.

Heck, I’d settle for ones that simply paid their taxes.

rbj on February 25, 2009 at 11:38 AM

That’s the best one yet! bahahaha

kthomas8268 on February 25, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Otherwise Dogbert for Treasury!

and the heartless Catbert (evil HR director) for what?
POTUS Chief of Staff maybe.

SaintGeorgeGentile on February 25, 2009 at 11:46 AM

I have no problem with attaching strings to bailout money, but those strings should have been attached at the time of acceptance. It’s wrong to offer someone money, and then wait until after they accept it to inform them that their acceptance now requires them to submit to other demands.

JohnJ on February 25, 2009 at 11:48 AM

I love the “wool-covered glob of fat”. Describes Barney Frank to a tee…..

CynicalOptimist on February 25, 2009 at 11:48 AM

Dogbert on YouTube, too! I’ve found another favorite!

apco on February 25, 2009 at 11:49 AM

I suppose when you’re begging for a trillion-dollar gift, you need to pucker up.

But I’ve often wondered what the standard is for “contempt” in a Senate hearing. I don’t care how serious the charge against me is; if people like Ted “Datekiller” Kennedy and Barney “Home-O Prostitution Ring” Frank try to act sanctimoneous toward me, there is no way in Hell I’m going to be able to keep a straight face.

logis on February 25, 2009 at 11:56 AM

perhaps our public servants should set the example first.

dream on… we are their servants, they are the american aristocracy.. the sooner we are OK with that fact, the sooner we can get on with the real important concerns like who’s going to win american idol and who is getting the boot on survivor this week.

gatorboy on February 25, 2009 at 12:03 PM

Scott Adams is amazing, as always.

youngTXcon on February 25, 2009 at 12:03 PM

PrincipledPilgrim on February 25, 2009 at 11:01 AM

Thanks for linking me :)

DaveC on February 25, 2009 at 12:05 PM

However, before pillorying executives for private jet use (which does create jobs), perhaps our public servants should set the example first.

You mean like giving up their princely salaries, world-class healthcare and retirement benefits? Like foregoing the lavish perks (eg., reserved parking spots a few steps from Washington-Reagan National Airport Main Terminal) or taxpayer funded junkets to expensive locales? Do you actually suggest a Congresscritter would tolerate being treated like those unwashed, stinking, people that elected them?

You living in al-Chicago’s dreamland?

SeniorD on February 25, 2009 at 12:06 PM

I thought we were rewarding bad behaviour?

Kini on February 25, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Nancy Pelosi.

Johan Klaus on February 25, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Perfect!

Christian Conservative on February 25, 2009 at 12:24 PM

perhaps our public servants should set the example first.

I do not know any servants who are millionaires.

Johan Klaus on February 25, 2009 at 12:26 PM

I love the “wool-covered glob of fat”. Describes Barney Frank to a tee…..

CynicalOptimist

Gotta add “drooling, limpwristed…” to that.

SKYFOX on February 25, 2009 at 12:33 PM

If the dog was a monkey, the Dilbert cartoons would be banned in the new Obama “everything is racist” world.

albill on February 25, 2009 at 11:22 AM

The monkeys should have been on the right (inquisition) side of the table.

Christian Conservative on February 25, 2009 at 12:34 PM

Courtesy of Uncle Sugar.

According to the latest announcement from Turbo Tim Geithner’s Treasury, TPTB has decided to make this particular credit non-recoverable from the taxpayer.

Here is the link

Clearly the government is desperate to get sheeple to sign off on death pledges for particle-board-and-stucco McMansions.

I’m still waiting for details on the Bank Bailout Plan Du Jour

KentAllard on February 25, 2009 at 12:41 PM

I’ve always wanted the corporations to do just that. When Microsoft was being sued by the Government, I wanted Bill Gates to announce that in an effort to stimulate the competition, no longer would Windows or any other Microsoft product be licensed to the Federal Government.

It’s a shame that our Corporate Execs are just as cowardly as our elected officials.

Snake307 on February 25, 2009 at 12:52 PM

From Martin Hutchinson -

Much though President Obama may not wish to admit it, his stimulus plans are not original. In 2001-02, a combination of a tax cut of 2% of GDP and spending increases of another 4% of GDP (partly the War on Terror, partly the No Child Left Behind Act and partly cyclical) provided fiscal stimulus of about 6% of GDP between the fiscal years (ending in September) 2001 and 2002. Monetary policy was also exceptionally stimulative, with short-term interest rates declining from 6% to 1% within a two-year period while inflation remained positive.

Judging by results, the George W. Bush stimulus worked rather better than the New Deal. It was begun from a position of fiscal surplus, lessening the strain placed on the debt markets by its borrowing, while inflation during the period was suppressed by the deflationary effects of globalization and the Internet. However, it distorted the economy, leading to an undue concentration in the unproductive sectors of housing and speculative finance, while manufacturing and much of the high-skill service sector was outsourced to Asia. Notoriously, the subsequent expansion led to very meager gains in living standards, except for the very rich, while inflation crept up and the federal budget deficit remained in substantial deficit, even at the top of the 2002-07 expansion.

This time around, the conditions for stimulus were much less propitious than in either the Great Depression or 2001-02. Public spending, including state and local spending, was far higher as a percentage of GDP than in the 1930s. In Europe, particularly Scandinavia and in Japan since 1990, we have seen the adverse effect on growth exerted by high public spending. The increase in global public spending through stimulus plans is thus likely to be substantially growth-destroying in its own right.

Second, an exceptionally large stimulus (including bank and mortgage bailouts) has been combined with a public sector deficit that was already excessive to produce a likely federal budget deficit in fiscal 2009 and 2010 of more than 10% of GDP in each year. The difficulties of financing these deficits will unquestionably be very serious, and the adverse effect on the U.S. Treasury’s ability to borrow resulting from their probable persistence will be equally severe. Outside the United States, Britain and Japan are notable among other countries that were already in a difficult fiscal position before the downturn hit, and will be in impossible positions as a result of their misguided stimuli.

Third, the Obama stimulus package, having been largely dictated by Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) consists largely of short-term state budget palliatives or handouts to favored constituencies, with very little TVA-type long-term beneficial spending.

Even in areas where true economic benefits might be expected, such as the $8 billion subsidy to high speed rail, the package has not been designed to favor rail projects in the country’s main centers of population and economic activity, which could hugely benefit from their rail systems being brought up to current international norms. Instead, it favors the utterly frivolous project to run a maglev train, the most expensive and least tested technology available, to the isolated casino result of Las Vegas. Politically, that project may be very attractive to Reid, but it is economically almost worthless because of Las Vegas’ geographic isolation. It would also be socially highly damaging, forcing the destructive forces of gambling even more deeply into the fabric of American society.

Finally, at the time stimulus began with the bank bailouts last October, there was very little slack in the U.S. economy, with unemployment only around 6%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average at bubble levels over 10,000, house prices still sharply overvalued and the U.S. savings rate still disgracefully moored at around zero. To re-stabilize the economy after its years of imbalance, the savings rate needed to be brought back to its historical level of around 8%, or rather more to make up for the years of nil saving, while the U.S. balance of payments deficit also needed to decline by 5% to 6% of GDP. In such circumstances, injecting yet more wasteful spending into the economy was a wholly perverse approach to the problem.

Going forward, we are now presented with an annual fiscal deficit of 10% of GDP that will be very difficult to finance or to eradicate (and that’s without taking account of further costs of any more bank bailouts that the erratic U.S. Treasury or the Federal Reserve may consider necessary.) President Obama’s Fiscal Responsibility Summit will find significant cuts in public spending impossible, given the political orientation of the decision-makers and the expectations of their followers. The only approach that will appear feasible is thus one of massive tax increases, delayed sufficiently as to allow recovery from the recession before they take effect.

KentAllard on February 25, 2009 at 12:57 PM

As long as Nancy Pelosi has ‘Witch One” at a cost of $75K a weekend, the Congress is in no position to criticize…

JIMV on February 25, 2009 at 12:58 PM

I can’t stop laughing!!!!
short, sweet, and spot on

stu.b.con on February 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM

As long as Nancy Pelosi has ‘Witch One” at a cost of $75K a weekend, the Congress is in no position to criticize…

JIMV on February 25, 2009 at 12:58 PM

That’s “Broomstick One”, and the real cost is the fleet of flying monkeys that accompanies her home.

And I refuse to apologize to Al Charlatan for that one!

Laura in Maryland on February 25, 2009 at 1:21 PM

I’m still a lowly HENRY (high earner not rich yet) but I’ve worked for numerous high net worth folks. One thing they pretty much all have in common is private jets and the reasons for them.
 
News anchors and pundits alike have talked about the time saved by busy and in demand folks by using private jets but that’s not it. I don’t understand why not 1 media figure or corp. target has brought this up.
 
The real reason for most of them is as follows. As high net worth individuals OR high level representatives of *important* companies all of these people are high value targets. Most large companies insure their top executives for very large sums as a portion of their business continuity regimes. Many even have rules that they cannot fly together simmilar to the Pres and VP rules. Virtually all of them require top figures to travel privately and keep their detailed schedules under wraps.
 
Why has no one made that point? With the flat out attacks on wealth and the wealthy we see growing these days maybe they just don’t want to make the point that they are high-net-worth high-velue targets? Can’t ya just hear Barney Frank’s answer for *that* problem?
 

$.02

GregoryNeilSmith on February 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM

The difference between CEO’s & Congress members is that the CEO’s flight is paid for my shareholders and Congress flies on my dime.

hburns on February 25, 2009 at 1:57 PM

Democrat Congressmen should not be paid, but should be forced to PAY $1,000,000 per year for the privilege of occupying the seat.

Since one million bucks is about 5% of what Democrat Congressmen steal per year (on average), I think that’s a pretty good deal.

NoDonkey on February 25, 2009 at 2:23 PM

The most expensive private air fleet is the Air Force 1/2 – Marine 1 that serves the personal use of one individual: the President (and VP for AF 2). I would agree that it is necessary, but for politicians to complain about private jet use at TAXPAYER cost is the most extreme form of hypocrisy.

jerseyman on February 25, 2009 at 2:52 PM

Hope Adams does more of these.

Done That on February 25, 2009 at 3:15 PM

Speaking of insufferable hypocrites, I heard that John Kerry will introduce legislation which will forbid TARPed banks from… throwing parties. Not kidding.

We know that many of these banks did not want this money, but had it forced on them. At his point I can’t help but wonder if there wasn’t an ulterior motive involved, whereby it would be easier to control them, tell them who to lend to, et cetera. One step short of nationalization, but still under the thumb of the Banking Queen.

Buy Danish on February 25, 2009 at 3:47 PM

The CEO of GM made $21M a year last year. That breaks down to $10,500 an hour. An hour of flying time on corp. jets goes for $6K.

Option 1: Fly ORD-DCA on United for $500. Spend 4 hours in the air. Spend 1.5 hours in ORD and 1.5 hours in DCA going through security. Total cost $500 plus 7 X $10,500 = $74,000

Option 2: Fly ORD-DCA on private jet. Spend $24K for jet and 4 hours in the air. Total = $24K + 4 X $10,500 = $66,000

The total cost is $8K less to fly on the corporate jet.

Of course nobody in Congress can figure this out. Not surprising though since they also think spending $1T a year more than you bring in through taxes is a prescription for economic growth.

angryed on February 25, 2009 at 3:49 PM

If the dog was a monkey, the Dilbert cartoons would be banned in the new Obama “everything is we define what’s racist” world.

albill on February 25, 2009 at 11:22 AM

just a little tweak for you, but otherwise spot on

xiao_en on February 25, 2009 at 4:24 PM

How about including retirement and health care programs? No reason congresscritters shouldn’t enjoy the benefits of their own legislation. a capella on February 25, 2009 at 10:48 AM

Great question and answer, a capella. Maybe the roadmap to recovering the House (where all seats are up) and the Senate (just 1/3) in 2010 should bring this issue to the forefront.

EconomicNeocon on February 25, 2009 at 4:35 PM

I thought this was PERFECT. The morons in Dc are such clowns that it’s not really funny anymore. The banking queen, Chuck U, Reid and Queen Bee need to be put in the “dude where’s my bailout line” real quick. I have had it. The talking down to everyone has to go buh-bye!

It’s a little more than a month since the One ascended to the throne, but I am really hoping the next 4 years go quick!

jdsmith0021 on February 25, 2009 at 5:52 PM

Didn’t the dems charter their own private train to take them on a retreat just after this hearing?
The train only went a couple of hundred miles, close enough to drive.

right2bright on February 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM

I really enjoyed this comic. Dilbert often misses the mark, but this one is a bullseye. Kudos to all of those who noted that Pelosi has a very expensive jet, essentially her private jet, flying her back to SF every weekend at taxpayer expense. Pot, meet kettle!!!!

Snidely Whiplash on February 25, 2009 at 8:07 PM

Mr Morrissey said :

“I agree that having the three CEOs of the American automakers fly to DC to plead poverty is laughably bad optics.”

Wait what huh? It this just an exceedingly strange typo, or am I missing something?

Kevin M on February 25, 2009 at 9:43 PM

I thought we all hated Scott Adams because of this entry in his blog:

http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/09/a-feeling-im-be.html

Come on hot air…commit to something!

BTW…you’re all still donating to Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s defense fund like you promised, right?

tlynch001 on February 25, 2009 at 11:17 PM

WHAT ABOUT THE PILOTS? Don’t they deserve a wage?

birdhurd on February 25, 2009 at 11:46 PM