Tyrant or corrupt?

I have to choose one, hmmm... sound like tyrant to me. Hehehe... Defenetly, i will choose the tyrant leaders. In my view, if peoples had been contaminated by corruption, the only person they care will be themself, and the only thing that cross in their mind will be more and more money. To earn more money they should have more power to eliminated the competitor. So, the corrupt leaders can become tyrant.

Yeah, that one can be a messy one. Both of them have a drawback and there is really not that much of a difference between both of them. A corrupt official is just a couple of steps away from being a tyrant after all, given a bit more power and control. In fact, most tyrants can be people who have become corrupt with their own power in many ways whatsoever. So neither of them are a good choice but since I have to choose, I would have to go with the corrupt politician. Better the devil that I know than the devil that I might not know as well. Therefore, the corrupt official is something that I have accepted as something that will be out there and all too present. They just do not get caught a lot of the time. Tyrants on the other hand, are something that is a bit more foreign. As I said, neither are good and I prefer anarchy over to having either have power, but since I have to pick one, corrupt wins over tyrant.

I would choose you! you're the best possible option and I know you have the best of both worlds, tyranny and corrupt. What more could we ask for?

Yikes. That's why I hate either-or questions. Especially thorny ones like these. If I really have to choose between the two evils, I'll think I'll go for the honest tyrant. I hate egotistical power-hungry tyrants just like the next guy (or gal), most especially those with a whole lot of blood on their hands. But the only thing I hate more than these tyrants are the greedy egotistical self-serving politicians who let their people suffer and die in multitudes because of extreme poverty and an apathetic government. I'd like to point out that in making this choice, I have my country's political history (the Philippines) to serve as reference: though President Marcos was an absolute monster (and a corrupt one as well), our present President (Arroyo) is a totally detestable leech. AND she has surpassed Marcos' record as a monster, too (I read somewhere that there are more human rights violations recorded under her 9-year term than under Marcos' 21 years). So there. Come to think of it, in the real world tyranny and corruption go hand-in-hand. It's rare to see one not relying on the other - corrupt officials need to be enforce tyranny to protect their personal interests, and tyrants often dip their hand in the national treasury to make their terms more profitable. I haven't really heard of an honest tyrant - perhaps someone could enlighten me on this one.