Home / Let’s Hear It For The Propagandists Of The Year!

Let’s Hear It For The Propagandists Of The Year!

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Thanks for joining us for tonight’s big announcement.

The Coalition of Republican Aggressive Propagandists (CRAP) is pleased to announce its winners for the 2005 award for propagandist of the year. Past winners have included Oliver North, Roger Ailes, and our founder, Richard Nixon.

This year we have, for the first time, a tie. Let’s hear it for Judith Miller of the New York Times, and I. Lewis Libby, former Dick Cheney’s chief of staff. They went above and beyond the call of duty, going way beyond their job description, not letting petty details like truth, laws, responsibilities or grand juries get in the way of what truly matters.

And what’s that? Yes, that’s right – getting the Republican spin into the news, subverting the political process and making more people vote “right”.. these are a few of our favorite things.

They were both nominated by Dick Cheney, who would be here today but he’s busy meeting with Karl Rove to plan on how they are going to try to get the indictments against Libby squashed.

On his nomination form, Cheney writes: “If they win, they should be sent – together – to live on the streets of Baghdad so they can watch, in person, the flowering of democracy in that saved nation.”

Ha! That Cheney is such a kidder.

No, as winners they both win a 25 percent share in Fox News and autographed books by Bill O’Reilly and Robert Novak.

Novak and Rove were also nominees this year but just did not go far enough. There’s always next year!

Thanks, you two, for providing the best CRAP of the year.

Powered by

About Scott Butki

Scott Butki was a newspaper reporter for more than 10 years before making a career change into education... then into special education. He has been doing special education work for about five years He lives in Austin. He reads at least 50 books a year and has about 15 author interviews each year and, yes, unlike tv hosts he actually reads each one. He is an in-house media critic, a recovering Tetris addict and a proud uncle. He has written articles on practically all topics from zoos to apples and almost everything in between.
  • Hmm, the silence is deafening.

  • Just a note – are you sure the winners don’t ALREADY own 25% of Fox?:)

    Nice one

  • Thanks.

    Possible re: Libby but doubtful re: Miller.

  • Bitter and unfunny tends to generate silence.


  • Dave, if that were true, there would be zero comments on your work, rather like mine!

  • tommyd

    Anyone who supports this abysmal and criminal and fascist Bush adminstration has CRAP between their ears.

    Good one Scott.

  • Nancy

    All of these are criminal, if not outright guilty of treason. Hopefully they’ll get what’s coming to them. Thanks for speaking bitter truth, Scott.

  • Thanks, Nancy and Tommy.

    Dave, it’s hard not to be bitter about being deceived.

  • Dave Nalle

    Scott, I’m still waiting for evidence from anyone of any deliberate deception. People keep saying they were deceived, yet there just don’t seem to be any facts to back that up.


  • tommyd

    Everything the criminal Bush regime has done has been done with deception and obfuscation and omission. Everything. The regime’s mouthpieces in the media, Judith Miller, Novak, Safire, Kristol, Krauthammer, Kristol, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Ingraham, Savage, et al were instruments of deceiveing the American sheeple into supporting an illegal, immoral, criminal, aggressive invasion of a weak country who were under sanctions for the previous 12 years, whose leader, Saddam, didn’t even have control over the whole country.

    The Nazi’s at Nuremburg all used the “I was just following orders” line, but were all either jailed and some executed. The biggest crime that convicted the Nazi regime was aggressive war against the peace. I’d have to say that the Bush Reich has come scarily close to committing the same crime, and they couldn’t have done it without their lapdog waterboys in the media.


  • Dave Nalle

    Tommy, people like you are what keeps this nation from solving its problems and moving forward. Irrational hatred is a terrible starting point for dialogue. Until you can look at events with at least some element of rationality and common sense you’re just a ghost howling in the wind and will never contribute to any kind of progress.


  • Libby is charged with not being truthful with the grand jury.
    How is that not deception?

    Karl Rove and Lewis Libby told President Bush – according to his spokesman – that they did not talk to reporters about Valerie Plame.

    That has proven to be false, according to the grand jury report, since both talked to reporters.

    How is that not also deception?

  • Who has “tried to get the indictments against Libby squashed”? I’m confused.

    Seems to me that it was the liberal side of the house that called for the grand jury, citing a law they formerly objected to when it was enacted because they said it was unconstitutional and infringed on freedom of the press (OK…).

    Then, when Fitzgerald went after Judy Miller and Matt Cooper for refusing to cooperate and (dare I say it in Judy’s case, not being truthful?), they cried “foul”. But when Libby did the same thing, it was “OMG, he broke the law!”. Can you blame some of us for laughing a bit? This is worse than Wimbledon – we all have whiplash.

    No one at the White House has tried to quash the indictment. And I know that even though I think this whole thing is dumb, if Libby lied, he is guilty and should be indicted. The law is the law, just as it was when they went after Ms. Miller. You have to cooperate with the grand jury, even if (IMO) it turns out no crime was committed, and you can’t obstruct justice during their investigation.

  • You’re omitting the important difference between Libby, Miller and Cooper namely the latter two have a professional and ethical responsibility to keep sources secret, if that is the arrangement they made.

    When asked for information they said they could not give it.

    When Libby was asked for information he made no such comment – instead he gave one version of events. Later, pressed with contradictory evidence, he gave a second version of events.

    I was reading the W. Post and the NYT yesterday and they were saying that usually in perjury cases a client can just say they misremembered and get acquitted. But Libby’s recollection – both versions – were so clear and specific he’s going to have a hard time wiggling his way out of that.