The paradox of being truthful but manipulative

Who claimed Bush was a liar?
You might call him manipulative, naïve, egocentric, paranoid, excessive, extremist, ultra-conservative, and dangerous at time… but not a liar.
Unfortunately, he has had the tendency to be truthful. Truthful in a smart and manipulative way. He has been pretty good and consistent at walking his talk. Announcing his next move and executing on it. The main reasons behind this are two fold:
1/ it gives his cabinet and advisors the ability to measure the opinion and media impact before executing on a plan or tactical move,
2/ he is fast. Fast in a dangerous way. You can not reproach him of being passive. He is always on the move. No matter how good or bad his policies are, he is implementing one after the other.

So is that good or bad? On a pure philosophical level, this is one characteristic too many of our politicians lack. They do not tell the truth. They do not execute on what they announce. The reverse side of medal is that the immediate impact of this “sudden credibility” is it gives one the greatest manipulation and populist communication tool. And Bush is no exception.

He has been very truthful, but not necessary honest. Honest is a completely different level. Being honest means having noble and positive ends, not manipulative ones.

For that, he gets an A for announcing his move, and an F for the use he makes of it.

SA