Great Caesar’s Ghost, I know folks say Mitt Romney will say or do anything to get into the White House, but cripe — there’s a whole lot of bearing false witness going on…
The Phoenix’s David Bernstein decided to dig into the GOP Clown Car occupant about Mitt’s assertion that he watched his father march with Dr. Martin Luther King during the civil rights era in Grosse Pointe, Michigan. He recounted this fable not once, but twice — first in his Faith in America speech (“I saw my father march with Martin Luther King.”), and again on Meet the Press, where he said:
“My dad marched with Martin Luther King. My mom was a tireless crusader for civil rights.”From “Was It All a Dream?“
[W]hile the late George W. Romney, a four-term governor of Michigan, can lay claim to a strong record on civil rights, the Phoenix can find no evidence that the senior Romney actually marched with King, nor anything in the public record suggesting that he ever claimed to do so.Oh my — and it gets worse. You have to read the response from the campaign. It’s after the jump.Nor did Mitt Romney ever previously claim that this took place, until long after his father passed away in 1995 — not even when defending accusations of the Mormon church’s discriminatory past during his 1994 Senate campaign.
…And, Mitt Romney would not have known about the event, let alone had a chance to “see” it. He was at that time in the middle of his two-year mission for the Mormon church in Le Havre, France. By his own description and others’, he was cut off from virtually all contact with his family; and at the time, King’s Grosse Pointe appearance was no more than local news.
Mitt was also aided and abetted by David Broder in perpetuating this falsehood, and the Detroit Free Press took a look at its archives and there’s no Romney to be found at the march, for religious reasons:
Romney’s campaign cited various historical articles, as well as a 1967 book written by Stephen Hess and Washington Post political columnist David Broder, as confirmation that George Romney marched with King in Grosse Pointe in 1963.What was camp Romney’s response to the charge that Mitt had his facts wrong about his daddy marching with Dr. King? (protect your keyboards):“He has marched with Martin Luther King through the exclusive Grosse Pointe suburb,” Hess and Broder wrote in “The Republican Establishment: The Present and Future of the GOP.”
Free Press archives, however, showed no record of King marching in Grosse Pointe in 1963 or of then-Gov. Romney taking part in King’s historic march down Woodward Avenue in June of that year. George Romney told the Free Press at the time that he didn’t take part because it was on a Sunday and he avoided public appearances on the Sabbath because of his religion.
Broder could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.
“He was speaking figuratively, not literally,” Eric Fehrnstrom, spokesman for the Romney campaign, said of the candidate.Hat tip goes to David at Blue Mass Group, who said:
Faced with the unfortunate reality that Mitt was making things up, his campaign has retreated into a hilarious Humpty-Dumptyism about what it means to “march with” someone. You see, it doesn’t mean that you were actually there. It means that, well, you participated in a march about a related topic on a different day, and maybe you thought about the guy while you were doing it.
58 Responses to “Mitt whopper fib: he didn’t see his dad march with Dr. King”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Figuratively? Damn.
That one word could be used to destroy the campaign, if people are determined to use it as sneering mockery at every turn.
However, I would wait to see if he can get the nom. I am more confident in the Dem’s ability to beat him than Rudy.
Imagine that. Willard lied. What are the odds?
Well, since he was talking, there were darn near close to 100%.
Political hack of the Mary Matalin, Lee Atwater type. Every word is a lie.
My father was the emperor of the universe, singlehandedly ended slavery in America, marched with Margaret Sanger for birth control rights, and walked on the moon with Neil Armstrong.
David Broder lied too!? I’m absolutely gutted to find out that even back in 1967, Broder was whoring for the right wing. Really, who would have imagined it?
On a less sarcastic note, Der Mittmeister looks to be in fair shape compared with Giuliani and Huckabee. Every day there are new revelations about the chasm between the real Huckabee and his Christian facade. Meanwhile, Giuliani’s lies carry much more legal jeopardy, and even the wingnuts are learning to hate him. Romney might be the one to get to the convention with his blow-dry the least mussed.
I’m from Massachusetts, so nothing about him surprises me, but did you catch Katie Couric’s interview of Romney the other night? She asked each major candidate if they ever get angry/lose their temper. Right away he said no, then a few minutes later, she persisted, and he said, Well, I kicked a door the other day. And they try to parse whether that constitutes anger. Kicking a door? That’s not losing your temper? What is wrong with this guy? His photo is next to ‘flip-flop’ in the dictionary.
Mitt’s father famously lost the possibility to become president because of his opposition to the War in Vietnam. Why doesn’t the brownnosing press ask him about that? Well, what a foolish question.
Well, the same dipshit press never asked George Wimp Bush about his grandfather who was a founder of and lawyer for Planned Parenthood.
I marched with Martin Luther King, too. I’m not sure if I’d been born and learned to walk when he marched in Chicago, but I know I marched with him.
Romney is a much bigger flip-flopper than Kerry ever was. Why is it not a bigger talking point? I mean, the Republicans seemed to deride flip-flopping just a few short years ago. Do they like it now?
Because the dems don’t seem to be as good as the rethugs in picking a short simple phrase (e.g., “Kerry is a flip-flopper”, “cut-and-run,” pick your misleading phrase) and getting it repeated over and over without variation on many different outlets. Sad to say, given our electorate’s attention span, that seems to be what you’ve got to do. No real discussion or nuance or explanation, just say the exact same phrase over and over enough times to hammer it into people’s heads and it somehow becomes “truth” to a lot of folks. So let’s get started:
Romney is a LIAR.
Romney is a LIAR.
Romney is a LIAR.
Romney is a LIAR.
Romney is a LIAR!
Romney is a LIAR!!
The man will do anything for power. Lying comes naturally to him.
My dad invented the telephone.
OK. He bought me a telephone once. But to me it was like he’d invented it. That’s all I mean!
Rhea, upon first reading your description of the interview I thought it said he’d kicked a dog. Which would not have surprised me, as the conservatives are known dog-abusers.
If George Romney’s ghost is still around, it must feel even worse about Mitt than Bush 41 feels about his son…
I wonder if the part about his mother is accurate. Or does “tireless crusader for civil rights” really mean “donated $10 to the Black Panthers in 1968″?
Rhea, upon first reading your description of the interview I thought it said he’d kicked a dog. Which would not have surprised me, as the conservatives are known dog-abusers.
Oh, he would never kick a dog. Just lash it to the top of the car and drive cross-country….
I wonder if the part about his mother is accurate. Or does “tireless crusader for civil rights” really mean “donated $10 to the Black Panthers in 1968″?
No, it probably means she tipped the cleaning lady an extra $2 at Christmas one year.
Mitt’s father famously lost the possibility to become president because of his opposition to the War in Vietnam.
No, he lost because he flip-floped on the war, and blamed his earlier support for the war on having been “brainwashed,” one of the classic all-time gaffes . . .
You know what this really reminds me of? Al Gore’s “I invented the Internet” brouhaha. Both people real did contrribute (Gore helped get funding to ARPANET, George Romney really did have a good civil rights record), but didn’t do a specific thing that slipped out of somebody’s mouth.
Let’s see if the media decides to do to him what they did to Gore. Personally, I’m not holding my breath.
I would be interested to find out if it can be documented where Romney was on the day the Mormon Church announced the “revelation” that blacks could be Mormon priests. Romney claims he was in his car when he heard the announcement on his car radio, and that he pulled over and wept. Call me cynical, but I have a hard time believing that.
Okay, so Mitt’s dad didn’t march with MLK- but he did stay at a Holiday inn Express last night…
My Dad was with God on the eighth day. He invented the patriarchy. He and God were having a few beers, they thought it would be a good joke. Who knew it would come to this?
Whether this will be seen as a lie and used against him, or seen as “truthiness” which allows him to slide - it all depends on whether his continued services are deemed necessary to the Reichwing cause.
At no point does the actual truth ever enter into this cynical calculation…
“‘He was speaking figuratively, not literally,’ Eric Fehrnstrom, spokesman for the Romney campaign, said of the candidate.”
Asked about PhysioProf’s assertion that he dated every cheerleader in his high school graduating class, PhysioProf spokesman Gene Strohphlegm said, “He was speaking figuratively, not literally”.
When we say, ‘I saw the Patriots win the World Series, it doesn’t necessarily mean you were there Mitt explains. Yeah, that’s certainly true . . .
Kylroy Actually, I’d argue that the two are not similar at all. Gore’s actual quote was: “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country’s economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.”
I included the sentence following the “creating the internet” comment because the context makes it clear that he’s talking about funding, initatives and so forth. He never claimed to have actually invented the internet, but instead accurately claimed that he was insturmental in its creation, which he was.
Romney, OTOH, has taken the good civil rights record of his father and completely invented an event that never happened (ie: marching with MLK). I’d argue that if we tried to imagine Gore doing something equivilant it’d be along the lines of Gore claiming to have founded the EPA on the basis of his good environmental record. [1]
There’s a world of difference between saying “my father was big in cvil rights” and saying “my father marched with MLK”.
As you noted, however, it won’t get the Gore treatment by our terribly liberal media. IOKIYAR after all.
[1] You just *know* that somewhere a wingnut is going to read that and the headlines will read “LIEberals claim Gore created the EPA!!!”
I checked with my mom. As she remembers it, King marched in Chicago when my older sister was a baby. So that settles it. I definitely marched with King. (Figuratively speaking, of course.)
Aw, hell. You mean to tell me that Mitt wasn’t born a poor black child?
Well, he may have had a nice house, good education, fine clothes, good food, but somewhere in town there was a poor black child. So Mitt was, too. Figuratively speaking.
Rea, there was also this one last month- Romney is such a disingenious buffoon!!
Is Mitt Romney Really a Red Sox Fan?
November 28, 2007 10:58 PM
ABC News’ John Berman Reports: The Former Massachusetts governor, who presided over the hub of Red Sox Nation for 4 years, and was Governor of the state in 2004 when they staged their epic, history- changing comeback and finally triumphed in the World Series, botched one of the holiest, most sacrosanct numbers in Red Sox lore.
At the close of the GOP debate in St. Petersburg, FL, Mitt Romney spoke of the 2004 World Series Championship: “Eighty-seven long years. We waited 87 long years. And true suffering Red Sox fans that my family and I are, we could not have been more happy than to see the Red Sox win the World Series.” The only problem with that statement? It was 86 years between Red Sox victories. 86 years! 1918 to 2004. That makes 86 years.
It is a number that millions of Red Sox fans know by heart. It is a number that many kids in Massachusetts know before they can even count.
What does this say about the Governor? His authenticity has been questioned on several issues: abortion, gay rights, gun control. Is his alleged Red Sox fan-dom also now in question? Romney, who was born and raised in Michigan, did once refer to Fenway Park as “Red Sox Stadium.”
Sources close to Romney say he realized his mistake immediately after the debate. Romney Spokesman Kevin Madden, a native New Yorker, had only this to say, “as a Yankee fan…we’ve won so many world series, that I have hard time keeping count.”
And for his idiot mouthpiece- Yanks have 26. Duh…
“Red Sox Stadium”??? Instead of FENWAY- Fenway, with the Green Monster??? What fucking moron makes THAT kind of mistake???
Obviously the Governor of Massachusetts and lifelong member of RSN does…
<clinton>See, it depends on what the meaning of “march” is…</clinton>
Yeah, I’m sure the Red Sox club loves you for being a Yankees fan. Way to win votes in Massachusetts.
BTW, I was wondering when a troll would bring up Clinton, as part of the “Clinton got a blow job, therefore anything Republican (fill in the blank) does is excused forever.” Looks like I win the office pool.
That was ten years ago, dude. Find a fresh clue.
“That was ten years ago, dude. Find a fresh clue.”
The Clinton Follies are the gift that just keeps on giving (to the Reichwing). I wonder how many more years they can work it?…
“Red Sox Stadium”??? Instead of FENWAY- Fenway, with the Green Monster??? What fucking moron makes THAT kind of mistake???
Obviously the Governor of Massachusetts and lifelong member of RSN does…
That’s why I always referred to him as (R-UT). The SJC fucked up; he simply wasn’t a resident of the Commonwealth….and he certainly didn’t remain one as Governor. His last year in office, he spent more time outside of MA than doing his job.
That was ten years ago, dude. Find a fresh clue.
Beg pardon? That was a tongue-in-cheek reference to the famous “meaning of ‘is’” comment, with Romney’s new “meaning of ‘march’” comment. You don’t need to get defensive over every little thing.
Really? Maybe it’s hard to see why it’s “tongue in cheek” because con trolls that cited that one ad infinitum, ad nauseum for the past decade. Perhaps it’s hard to see why it’s tongue in cheek because that quote doesn’t actually mention Mitt, just Clinton. It’s certainly not tongue in cheek because that quote just isn’t funny, and hasn’t been funny for the last nine years.
TIME FOR A RETRACTION HERE AND FROM THE PHOENIX!
Harper’s Magazine 1967 article by William V. Shannon. pg 60. http://www.harpers.org/media/pages/1967/02/pdf/HarpersMagazine-1967-02-0015313.pdf
“When the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King marched in Detroit three years ago, Romney marched with him.”
Clearly, Mitt may be remembering what his father told him: unless you think this is a family conspiracy from the grave: which of you do, right?
anonymousguy,
In 1978 Romney claimed that he himself marched with King. He didn’t. He’s a serial liar.
Got anything worthwhile fool?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22361410/
Romney’s a habitual offender when it comes to this sort of, um, creativity with truth.
BTW, that he spent years at Harvard and STILL managed to mangle the Red Sox info just shows what an idiot this guy is.
The Phoenix said:
“the Phoenix can find no evidence that the senior Romney actually marched with King, nor anything in the public record suggesting that he ever claimed to do so. ” is PROVEN wrong- based on the Harper’s Article.
The Phoenix tells mistruths that cast dispersions and then doesn’t correct them: It is a bold faced lie to let the article stand without correction.
Go ahead, call me another name and prove your intelligence.
Edit comment: apologies:
“dispersions” should be “aspersions”.
The Phoenix said:
“the Phoenix can find no evidence that the senior Romney actually marched with King, nor anything in the public record suggesting that he ever claimed to do so. ” is PROVEN wrong- based on the Harper’s Article.
The Phoenix tells mistruths that cast aspersions on Mitt and then doesn’t correct them: It is a bold faced lie to let the article stand without correction.
Go ahead, call me another name and prove your intelligence.
anonymousguy,
give us a link to the actual picture instead of a blank page….
And, why is Willard now backpeddling, saying it was all “figurative” and admitting they never marched together, and that his own claim to have marched with MLK was false…got anything yet?
The Phoenix tells mistruths that cast aspersions on Mitt and then doesn’t correct the
Would this be casting aspersions?
Willard cares only for himself and the acquisition of power, and he will do and say absolutely anything to acquire it.
There’s some pretty strong evidence to that effect.
You lying sack of shit. That article only contains ink drawings.
Worthless fuck. About as honest as Willard.
Where’s your retraction, anonymousguy?
you did lie after all.
For those that want to review the Harper’s reference, but do not want to pay for a subscription to Harper’s: http://www.harpers.org/search?q=romney+martin+luther+king+march+
Look for the first match, then READ the WORDS across from the picture.
Your mom must be real proud of your use of language.
“Your mom must be real proud of your use of language.”
Ooooo!!! Burn!!!
MAJeff, NOW are you sorry you said something nasty to that fuckhead anonymousguy?…
you mean the fuckwit lying sack of shit? The one who doesn’t even know that Romney himself is backing away? Typical right wing idiot.
hey, anonoymousguy: Romney’s a liar! We’ve been dealing with his nonosense here in the bay state for quite a while.
And yet, you cling to nonreality—fuckwit.
So, was the Phoenix article accurate or not?
Mitt clearly did not make up the main story of his father marching with King: which was a primary insinuation by the Phoenix.
You can’t acknowledge their inaccuracy and all you can do is spout off your potty-mouths.
You sure showed me how rational you guys are.
Peace.
Willard’s father did not march.
True or false?
Willard himself did not march, as he claimed.
True or false?
George Romney did march.
There are eye-witnessses that said they saw Romney and King march together. There are other witnesses that said they did not see Romney and King march together: but made clear that they were not sure enough to state that they were sure that Romney and King did not march together.
Mitt did not march with King. One time in the 70’s, he said he did. He retracted it a long time ago.
Now you can show everyone your integrity and return the courtesy and answer my question in a forthright manner.
George Romney did march.
On separate days as King.
That has been established through the bloody Grosse Point historical society. Willard was trying to make himself look better. He could have said, “My family supported civil rights” and given examples. But, he chose to keep repeating the false story that daddy marched with King, which several sources have shown to be false.
Romney is a liar.
I did not ask you if Romney was a liar:
I asked you whether the Phoenix’s insinuation that Mitt made up the story that his father marched with King is clearly contradicted by the information in the Harper’s Magazine article.
An actual answer to the question you were asked would help your reputation on being able to engage in fair debate where the participants get to ask questions and expect to get honest responses.
I don’t care what you asked.
Willard is a liar, a worthless bigoted piece of shit.
anonfuck: we’re not you’re monkeys. you’re questions, demands and opinions are meaningless.
I respectfully disagree with your position.
Your lack of courtesy not to answer a simple question put to you does not reflect well on your objectivity.
Peace and Best Wishes.
Your lack of courtesy not to answer a simple question put to you does not reflect well on your objectivity.
Peace and Best Wishes.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
esp the peace and best wishes
I actually do hope you find peace and I wish you the very best in life.
Why would you think I would want anything else for you?
Just because you look at life and Mitt differently than I do? I really don’t feel any animosity toward you at all.
You really don’t think any of your responses bothered me, do you?
Anyway,
Peace.