Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Faith, Governors, Scandal | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Conservatives, Elections, Extremism, George W. Bush, Liars, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Republicans, Ronald Reagan, Rudy Giuliani
In order to diffuse criticism that the Mormon church is racist (since it took them until 1978 to allow African-Americans to be ordained or participate in certain temple ceremonies) Mitt Romney started saying that his father–Michigan Governor George Romney–once marched with Martin Luther King Jr.Unfortunately for him, a few journalists started digging and they found that Romney’s story is completely made-up.More from Blue Mass Group:
Mitt Romney will stop at nothing to score political points. Even if it means lying outright about his father.
I saw my father march with Martin Luther King.
Uh huh.
He made a similar statement Sunday during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” He said, “You can see what I believed and what my family believed by looking at our lives. My dad marched with Martin Luther King. My mom was a tireless crusader for civil rights.”
Right. Got it — dad marched with MLK. Even David Broder says so, and supplies some corroborative detail intended to give artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative. (BMG bonus points for identifying the source of that phrase!)
As Mitt Romney recalled in his address, his father was able to remind people that he had marched with Martin Luther King Jr. (through upscale Grosse Pointe, Mich., in support of open-housing legislation).
Problem is, it’s not true. None of it. As the Phoenix’s David Bernstein reveals (see also update here) in some superb digging, George Romney never marched “with” — i.e., in the presence of, at the same place at the same time — Martin Luther King, Jr.
Here’s Bernstein, who in addition to calling out Romney, calls out Broder:
[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. 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.Asked about the specifics of George Romney’s march with MLK, Mitt Romney’s campaign told the Phoenix that it took place in Grosse Pointe, Michigan. That jibes with the description proffered by David S. Broder in a Washington Post column written days after Mitt’s College Station speech.
Broder, in that column, references a 1967 book he co-authored on the Republican Party, which included a chapter on George Romney. It includes a one-line statement that the senior Romney “has marched with Martin Luther King through the exclusive Grosse Pointe suburb of Detroit.”
But that account is incorrect. King never marched in Grosse Pointe, according to the Grosse Pointe Historical Society, and had not appeared in the town at all at the time the Broder book was published. “I’m quite certain of that,” says Suzy Berschback, curator of the Grosse Pointe Historical Society. (B[ro]der was not immediately available for comment.)
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.
Mitt, in other words, was “speaking figuratively, not literally.”
[Emphasis Added]
This is just ridiculous. Romney has been lying and flip-flopping since day 1 of his campaign, but this more than takes the cake. What sense does it make to diffuse criticism that the Mormon church is racist by making up a story about his father marching with Martin Luther King, even though such a claim is blatantly untrue and can be proven false relatively easily? And what kind of truth-bending hair-splitting parsing is it to say that his father marched “figuratively” with King? How does one figuratively march with someone?
Seriously, is this is the best the GOP can do? A flip-flopping serially-exaggerating Governor of Massachusetts, the scandal-prone law-bending cross-dressing Mayor of New York City, and the corrupt, incompetent, vindictive, radical fundamentalist Arkansas Governor with exceptionally poor judgment and Ron Paul? Seriously?
Conservatives don’t seem to understand that the Republican Party is at a historic crossroads. They have the chance to leave their Reagan-Bush era baggage behind and redefine what it means to be a conservative. They can ditch the burden of the Bush years by nominating a visionary candidate who will lead their party into the future, undoing the damage they caused and improving the lives of millions of Americans.
Instead, the GOP nominates a field full of faceless cookie-cutter Republicans; a field full of liars, exaggerators, incompetents, radicals, extremists and others who are completely unfit to be America’s next President. Romney’s latest fabrication shows just how poor the Republican field is, and just how desperate the GOP has become.
UPDATE: Daily Kos has this supposed clarification from the Romney campaign:
A spokesperson for Mitt Romney now tells the Phoenix that George W. Romney and Martin Luther King Jr. marched together in June, 1963 — although possibly not on the same day or in the same city.
[Emphasis Added]
Again, how can you and someone else march together if you’re not in the same city or even doing it on the same day? Doesn’t that contradict the meaning of “together?” Do we even need to discuss this?
Romney’s in serious trouble. He’s been losing momentum for weeks, and this latest incident shows just how much of a slick used car salesman he is–willing to say anything, anything at all, just to get you on his side. This man should not be allowed anywhere near the White House. Period.
UPDATE II: More from The Huffington Post’s Chris Kelly:
Although they never marched together, they did march separately. In that they were both in Michigan and ambulatory at the same time. And, by “the same time,” I mean “different times.”
Except, if you read the Phoenix story, George Romney didn’t actually “march” anywhere. But he was present at an event. Where King was not.
And Mitt never “saw” it, because he was doing missionary work in France.
WHAT MITT MEANT:
We can all agree that George Romney and Martin Luther King were both alive in June, 1963.
1 Comment






Shame on Mike Huckabee. It was Mike Huckabee who raised the issues of a religious test for office, Romney’s faith as a cult, and promoting himself as the only “Christian Candidate”.
Huckabee stands back and acts like an innocent, all the while framing questions about Romney’s faith to be questions of his character and integrity. Shame on Mike Huckabee.
Paragraph 3, Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution reads, “. . . all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
Well, so much for the Constitution in Huckabee‘s mind. On the campaign trail to the 2008 presidential election, religious bigotry has reared its ugly head. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is a Mormon. As his poll numbers continue to rise there is a sudden, alarming amazement, a dread resulting in utter confusion and dismay led by Mike Huckabee!
In many denominations pastors rely on the church as their source of income. They are good, moral people whom, I believe, earnestly minister to their respective flocks. Yet, it is also their livelihood. Mormons do not pay their leaders and, doctrine aside, evangelical leaders have problems with that. Too, the rapid growth and retention rates of the Mormon Church, coupled with its superlative welfare system have only added grief to the evangelical leadership. So, from the evangelical seminaries to the smallest southern pulpit the Mormon doctrine is attacked.
Never mind that one would be hard pressed to find a more humble, clean-living, patriotic, law-abiding and civic-minded group of people than a Mormon congregation. Never mind that the church’s name is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Never mind that two major articles of their faith are: We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost, and We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may. Mormons just cannot be Christians! But they are.
Pastor turned candidate Mike Huckabee, while speaking (preaching) to the choir at the Values Summit said, “Faith is also threatened, and let me share with you how. I believe that there are many who will seek our support. But let me say that it’s important that people sing from their hearts, and don’t merely lip-synch the lyrics to our songs. I think it’s important that the language of Zion is a mother tongue, and not a recently acquired second language. It’s important that a person doesn’t have more positions on issues that Elvis had waist sizes.” Oh, that was subtle, and hateful. It is just pure religious bigotry; “you can only believe what we say you believe.” And it is offensive to the principle of religious freedom. Where do these ideas come from? Well, just ask Noah Crowe, a Southern Baptist pastor from North Carolina, there’s nothing Romney can do to overcome their distrust of Mormonism. “he studied Mormonism at his evangelical college in a course called Cults and False Religions. He claims there’s nothing Romney can do to overcome their ideas on Mormonism.
Unfortunately in the evangelical south, such rhetoric has marginalized the most qualified presidential candidate, the one who most shares their value system. Moreover, this consternation is unwarranted.
More than a few members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have served in our Federal Government. Democrat Senator Harry Reid is the current senate majority leader. Ezra Taft Benson, Republican, served as Secretary of Agriculture in Eisenhower’s administration. J. Reuben Clark, Republican, was appointed U.S. State Department Solicitor. In 1928, he was appointed Undersecretary of State. In 1930, ambassador to Mexico. Most in the Republican party know of Paula Hawkins of Florida, Gordon Smith of Oregon, Ron Packard and Ivy Baker Priest of California, and, of course, Orrin Hatch. Democrats know Stewart Udall of Arizona, Tom Udall of New Mexico, Ralph Harding of Idaho
Indeed, on famousmormons.net Stephen M. Studdert, Special Assistant to President Reagan says, “Ronald Reagan truly admired the Latter-day Saints. His administration included more members of the Church than any other American president, ever. Three of us, David Fischer, Gregory Newell and I, served on his personal White House staff. Richard Wirthlin was his chief strategist. Terrel Bell served as Secretary of Education, Bay Buchanan was Treasurer, Rex Lee was Solicitor General. His White House included Roger Porter, Brent Scowcroft, Richard Beal, Blake Parish, Jon Huntsman, Dodie Borup and Rocky Kuonen, and there were many other Latter-day Saints throughout his Administration.
The list goes on and on. Many more members have served in high and trusted positions throughout the world in business, medicine, law, education, media, sports, and entertainment. Thank goodness. After all, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
Comment by Kenneth Howell December 21, 2007 @ 12:00 PM