Media bias comes in many forms, but mostly in what the MSM refuses to cover or ignores outright. For instance, Mel Gibson's despicable anti-Semitic outbursts received the coverage they deserved. On the other hand, Tom Hanks can spend five minutes joking around with a guy in blackface at an elite school in the Pacific Palisades, and the media pretty much pretends it never happened.
The reason for this is simple. One guy made "The Passion of the Christ" and the other is a high-powered, left-wing A-lister who tells lies about Sarah Palin.
Tom Hanks also did something else -- he narrated "The Road We've Traveled," a 17-minute, White House-produced propaganda documentary that attempts to spin President Obama's failed presidency into something glorious and Dear Leaderish. The only problem is that, even for some members of the left-wing media, the propaganda is a bit thick.
[P]art of the film contains a gross inaccuracy. Specifically, it claims that General Motors (GM) has fully repaid its federal bailout loan. It has not — meaning the documentary contains a $25 billion error.
Of the nearly $50 billion given to GM, just under half has been repaid to the government. Officials still argue the auto bailouts were a good investment due to the hundreds of thousands of jobs saved by that decision, and it is accurate to say that GM has returned to record profits — as have all the other major American automakers.
Good for them, and good for The Washington Post, as well:
...the impression left by the film, especially if you watch it (go to the 8:45 mark), is very similar to Obama’s 2008 campaign rhetoric: His mother was denied health-insurance coverage, draining her resources, and with better coverage she might have lived longer.
These are two glaring falsehoods produced by the White House, yet you are hardly hearing anything about either in the media.
Remember the storm that ignited last November when the corrupt media went after Romney for what they considered a deliberate misquote of Obama in one of his campaign ads?
Politifact was the chief driver of this non-story, that eventually blew up into a three day anti-Romney narrative that questioned the former Massachusetts governor's character and credibility. But what the media was really doing was sending a message that criticism of Obama was off-limits, unless the criticism is 100% water tight. Because if it's not, we are going to make you and your credibility the story.
Which would be fine, but we all know that that standard only applies one way. And proof of the corrupt media's double standard can be found right here.
Politifact took a long hard look at the Obama reelection propaganda film and found it to be … mostly true!
Yep, 3 "mostly true's" to 1 "mostly untrue."
Never saw that coming.
In the article, Politifact claims they'll "be fact-checking the film over the next few days and will be updating this story with our Truth-O-Meter items as we publish them."
So what's taking so long?
In my opinion, Politifact is in no hurry to pants-on-fire Their Precious One. It wouldn’t even surprise me if they found a way to rationalize both of the Obama falsehoods listed above into something like, "False But We Understand." After all, this is the same outlet that fact-checked a rare "Saturday Night Live" skit critical of Obama.
What I do know, though, is that regardless of how Politifact reports it, two glaring falsehoods present in a reelection film produced by the White House will not get a hundredth the attention Romney did when he supposedly took Obama out of context.