Skip to comments.Four Pinocchios for Romney on MLK ("Well, it was somebody who certainly looked like him.")
Posted on 12/23/2007 2:18:05 PM PST by greyfoxx39
"They [George Romney and Martin Luther King] were hand in hand...They led the march. We all swung our hands, and they held their hands up above everybody else's."
Quote distributed by the Mitt Romney campaign.
After news reports challenged Mitt Romney's repeated accounts of his father marching with Martin Luther King, his campaign put a reporter from Politico in touch with eyewitnesses who claimed to have seen the former Michigan governor "hand in hand" with the civil rights leader. But their memories are almost certainly flawed as contemporaneous news reports show that King was addressing a meeting in New Jersey at the time the eyewitnesses supposedly saw him in Grosse Pointe, MI.
Romney did show up at a smaller march the following Saturday in the exclusive Grosse Pointe suburb of Michigan to protest housing discrimination. But contemporaneous news reports show that King had left the Michigan area by then, and was traveling in the Northeast
"I was fifteen feet away from them [Romney and MLK]," said Robertson, 64, who attended Grosse Pointe high school. "You don't forget that kind of thing."
I called up one of the eyewitnesses cited by Politico and the Romney campaign, Ashby Robertson.
When I told Robertson that news reports placed Martin Luther King in New Jersey at the time, he replied: "Well, it was somebody who certainly looked like him."
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.washingtonpost.com ...
Since Nov 1, 2007
Are you a paid operative of the Romney Campaign?
Is Romney ready to call the author of this statement a false prophet and a racial bigot:
"Let this Church which is called the kingdom of God on the earth; we will sommons the first presidency, the twelve, the high counsel, the Bishoprick, and all the elders of Isreal, suppose we summons them to apear here, and here declare that it is right to mingle our seed, with the black race of Cain, that they shall come in with with us and be pertakers with us of all the blessings God has given to us. On that very day, and hour we should do so, the preisthood is taken from this Church and kingdom and God leaves us to our fate. The moment we consent to mingle with the seed of Cain the Church must go to desstruction, -- we should receive the curse which has been placed upon the seed of Cain, and never more be numbered with the children of Adam who are heirs to the priesthood untill that curse be removed.
"Therefore I will not consent for one moment to have an african dictate me or any Bren. with regard to Church or State Government. I may vary in my veiwes from others, and they may think I am foolish in the things I have spoken, and think that they know more than I do, but I know I know more than they do. If the Affricans cannot bear rule in the Church of God, what buisness have they to bear rule in the State and Government affairs of this Territory or any others?"
Read the thread
What difference? They are both lying...big lies. You a MItt supporter?
THIS is the best Romney haters can do?
“Did you miss out on all the other threads on this subject?”
Yeah, they all make a big deal out of Romney saying his dad marched with MLK. And I say, if he didn’t actually march with MLK on a particular day, it’s no big deal.
Now, if you want to attack Romney because he’s a big spender or pro-abortion, or some other substantive issue, I might pay attention to it. But this flap is just a waste of time.
So congratulations, Romney loathers, the Washington Post, along with the Globe and the Times, are on the case. What "fact checking" has Michael Dobbs published about the Democrat candidates?
As far as I am concerned, Romney can hold his head high in regards to his family being on the right side of the civil rights issue when it counted.
Hokum. The Romney campaign hasn't turned up any news reports from '63 that say Romney and King marched together. Their activities are both well-documented: Romney was respecting the Sabbath and declined to do the march on June 23, something King spoke of at the time; and King was in New Jersey when Romney finally attended an event at Grosse Pointe MI on June 29.
"My father and I marched with Martin Luther King Jr. through the streets of Detroit."
It's no big deal to you that Mitt completely made that up?
“THIS is the best Romney haters can do?”
You have to remember that these people have nothing else left. Their candidate is polling at 3% in key states (!), with zero chance of winning so all they have is to spread DNC planted MSM attack articles. At least it makes them feel better so we should understand them. Substantive criticism requires skills not necessary available among rapid MDS-sufferers. It is much easier to repeat DNC stories or to shout short slogans (GO XXX!). It is sad but true. Their candidate has a great message, but the messenger is wrong.
I might be pretty frustrated myself if my favorite candidate would be polling at 3% (ok 5% in Iowa, 2.8% in NH).
DNC/MSM attacks are clear proof that they are afraid of Romney. It is a pretty good news.
I was a naive college kid thirty years ago when Bill Brock, a native of my home state of Tennessee, became GOP chairman. One of his first initiatives was to launch a campaign to win the black vote for the Republicans. I saw him on one of the sunday talk shows explaining his plan, and on paper it seemed to make all the sense in the world.
Brock noted that Republicans had voted for the civil rights laws in the sixties in greater numbers than Democrats. He said that it was Republican Earl Warren who handed down the Brown ruling. It was Republican Eisenhower who sent in the troops to integrate Little Rock schools. Brock added that most blacks were pro-life and supported school prayer. At the time, Republicans were getting about 10% of the black vote. Brock hoped to boost those numbers to 25% within ten years and even claimed that the GOP could win the majority of the black vote eventually.
Guess what? Thirty years later we still get 10% of the black vote.
Back in the sixties, Everett Dirksen, the GOP Senate leader, pushed incesssantly for civil rights legislation. A majority of GOP senators voted for every civil rights initiative of the decade. At the end of the decade, they still got 10% of the black vote.
George Romney may or may not have actually marched with Martin Luther King, but he certainly allied himself with King and the Civil Rights movement. Romney even supported idiocies like forced busing and a wildly over-the-top plan to forcibly integrate suburbs by requiring race quotas in every neighborhood (Nixon stopped that one). At the end of Romney’s years as Michigan governor, Michigan blacks still voted 90% for the Democrats and turned Detroit into a one-party Democrat kingdom that dominates the state with stolen ‘Rat votes.
The idea that the Democrats are in a panic mode and fear that blacks will defect to Romney because his daddy supported civil rights laws 45 years ago is ludicrous.
All I hear is “love” for Huckabee in the MSM.
I just looked at a couple of “key states”, Fred is no where near 3%. RCP has him at 9.7 in Iowa and 13.5 in SC.
Hell if he get’s any higher I may get nervous...
Come on man, if you want to bull$hit, which you do a lot of, make sure it is at least not easily verifiable....
Your arguments sound pretty convincing and I agree with them. Anyway, I wasn’t thinking that Romney would get majority of black votes. I think Bush got something like 12% (other republicans got around 8-9%) in 2000.
My point was that with Hillary beating Obama, the black turnout might be 10% less than last time, and Romney might get 12% instead of the usual 9%. Combined, this would make a big difference in many states.
I certainly agree that many Romney Sr policies sound awful. I assume Romney Jr does not support race quotas or other idiotic policies.
Damn man, you work like a Democrat...
Repeat that lie, it will be truth one day, you hope...
“Fred is no where near 3%.”
Ok, Thompson is now at 3.2% in NH (in the morning the average was 2.8 - apparently some older poll got eliminated today). WOW!
So you are correct. He is nowhere near 3%. Not even close. My mistake.
In MI, he is at 6.5% (Average), while the latest poll have him at 4% and 5%. In Nevada he is also single-digits (9.7 AVG, most recent 5%).
In Iowa, he is at 9.7% (AVG), most recent is 5%.
In SC, he is in double-digits, but is a long way to SC. I don’t think anybody seriously believes that getting 5-7% in NH and MI will somehow catapult him winning in SC (where he is now third). But I admire your spirit. Maybe he’ll finish third in Iowa, then get the 4% in NH, then shock 7% in MI and then finishing in top-2 in SC. LOL.
Seriously, only a shock win in Iowa can help him. Otherwise, he’ll be trounced in NH and MI. All media attention is in MI for a whole week.
I wonder which one of the candidates constructed this straw man.
Does a candidate get a pinochio any time one of his supporters says something wrong?
If so, Fred’s in trouble.
I’ve given up trying to talk sense into those who seem hell-bent to believe any media source, no matter how liberal and biased, so long as they say something they like.
I finally realised it was futile when one after another, they showed up to sing the praises of a liberal editorial board who was attacking Romney for not supporting banning torture, and who had just said Biden was their man.
Maybe Fred has the right idea. Don’t say anything, answer no questions, just stand around with a grumpy expression on your face and let you wife talk — then nobody will ever question whether anything you said is different than what some liberal reporter can dig up from some other source.
“There you go with that 3% again...”
Just curious. Would you say that 3.2% is close to 3% ?
Who knows, maybe it is 3.9% next week, maybe even 4%.
In all early states (IA, NH, MI) he is in single-digits and the most recent polls have him at 5%. Anyway, if you feel confident then I have to admire your spirit. lol.
It's really astonishing. We've got several wars going with Islamic extremists, we have an Iran bent on getting nukes, and a new Stalin taking power in Russia, and all the MSM seem to be worried about is whether a long-deceased governor, with a well-established civil rights record, physically marched in a demonstration with long-desceased civil rights activist.
If one thing's for sure, the reporters who waste their time writing such crap, as well as people who waste bandwith posting it (that means you greyfoxx39) sure have their priorities screwed up.
That George Romney was a pro-civil rights governor who instilled the same values into his son matters. That he marched in civil rights rallies organized by King and in solidarity with him matters.
Why does it matter whether governor G. Romney and King physically marched together at the same demonstration? And why would it matter whether his son, who was a teenager at the time, correctly or incorrectly remembers such a meaningless, insignificant detail?
Not that I'm conceding that he doesn't remember correctly. It's been by no means been established that G. Romney didn't march with King. Some sources indicate he did, others did not. Frankly, I don't see why anyone should care.
Again, some facts matter, others don't. Why anyone would waste his time on this one is beyond me.
...and God said, "Have you considered my servant, Fred?"
Thus sayeth the Lord, "Tis better to go with the percieved lazy one than the liar."
I don't consider keeping another duplicitous, double-talking, lying, flip-flopping person from the White House wasting my time. I'm sorry for you if you don't think that facts/truth matter - but they do for me.
I've never criticized Mitt on his religion. I base my opinion of him on his lack of honesty and flip-flopping positions. These are issues that I'm not willing to compromise on.
2 count them, 2 out of 500 according accounts of the crowd, are all the other 498 dead?
You said key states,which is more than just NH...
Facts is facts.
“You said key states,which is more than just NH...”
The latest poll numbers are between 4-5% in IA, NH, MI.
These are the key states. FL and SC are later and there is no way Thompson can survive to SC until he wins Iowa (or NH). Getting third in Iowa does not help him at all. Somebody will have the momentum to MI. It may be Romney, Huckabee, or Guliani, or even McCain. They have credible chance of winning or at least finishing strong second.
“Hokum. The Romney campaign hasn’t turned up any news reports from ‘63 that say Romney and King marched together.”
Incorrect. There are no less than 5 that state that they marched together. You’d consider Harper’s Magazine reputable?
“When the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King marched in Detroit three years ago, Romney marched with him.”
There are also 4 history books that cite them walking together.
From “Detroit: City of Race and Class Violence”
“Mayor Cavanagh, Governor George Romney, and Walter Reuther were among the prominent whites marching with Revered King. The size of the march surprised everyone. About 50,000 were expected, and at least triple that number showed up.”
From “A Nation Divided: The 1968 Presidential Election”
“[Governor Romney] also marched with Martin Luther King, Jr. on one occasion and fought for an open housing law in Michigan.
David Broder’s book , The Republican Establishment, also cites them as marching together
Also from Detroit Perspectives: Crossroads and Turning
“Between 150,000 and 200,000 people participated, 90% of them black. Mayor Cavanagh, Governor George Romney, and Walter Reuther were among prominent whites marching with Reverend King.”
I will further note that these sources were readily available to the MSM.
Instead of actually doing the research, they just slandered Romney and left it up to him to clean up their mess.
Lovely to see others from supposedly the same movement dogpiling in.
Did you even read this stuff? The Harper's Magazine is from February '67, gets the date wrong (it was closer to four years earlier than three), and probably apes Broder (or maybe Broder aped him) in confusing the Grosse Pointe march with the King one 6 days earlier. As I said before, the news reports from 1963 firmly establish that George Romney did not march with King on June 23, and King was in New Jersey on June 29 when Romney was at Grosse Pointe. From the similarity in phrasing your "history" books are just aping each other, and copying and repeating an error does not turn the error into truth.
You Romney people are giving me flashbacks to the Clinton years. I know MoveOn.org is already taken, but maybe you fellows could make a bid on MoveOn.com?
“IF Romney has been lying about his political resume (and he has)”
No he hasn’t. He described his father as a Civil Rights leader, which he was:
“If in fact thorough research (which will take some time) shows that either 1) Romney and King did march together or 2)These historians and reporters were citing each other on a mistaken fact as to the June 23, 1963 march, the fact remains that George Romney did indeed lead a march for Civil Rights (whether or not King was with him at the time) and that George Romney was a Civil Rights leader in general and that he marched in solidarity with King in immediate response to Selmathe most defining Civil Rights episode of the era.”
What we dont need is to fall for gotcha politics to such a degree that a man is called a liar for stating things remembered by witnesses and written up as fact in multiple history books. The Romney campaign made the correct clarification already.
"Mitt Romney went a step further in a 1978 interview with the Boston Herald. Talking about the Mormon Church and racial discrimination, he said: "My father and I marched with Martin Luther King Jr. through the streets of Detroit."
Face it. Romney is a liar on a par with Clinton.
Clinton: I saw church burnings in Arkansas.
Romney: I marched with Martin Luther King.
Do you really want this clown for president?
And LOSE BIG TIME with it. The Hillary/Obama will turn off white voters massively if they try the 'diversity' ticket. They tried tying Bush to the KKK in 2000, and it helped keep blacks 'on the plantation' but it didnt change the election.
The fact is that Mitt Romney's Dad was a Republican Civil Rights leader. It's a good counterpoint to any DNC attacks on this typical "they are racist" line against the GOP, which are defamatory, but predictable.
Church leader Bruce R. McConkie, on the denial of equality for Africans:
Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them... Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned... (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, p. 477)
Future President of the Mormon church, Joseph Fielding Smith wrote:
Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race.
(The Way to Perfection, page 101)
More from Smith:
There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there.
(Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, page 61)
False Prophets and False Apostles?????
Will Romney ever call these bigots "racist"?
You have no way of knowing whether it changed the election or not. No way to know how many votes it may have swayed. If you want to say "Bush still won" that would be accurate.
Tomster, you keep claiming this -- please cite these so-called 1960s MSM sources that claim Romney and MLK marched together at the same event. From what I've seen, the only source from the 1960s that claims George Romney and MLK marched together is a citation from a 1967 *book* that is unfootnoted and unsourced. I've seen no newspaper articles to that effect, and I've seen several that explicitly state that the two were not at the same event.
Why mention the race of the witnesses?
Because Willard claimed he saw it happen, a double lie.
And why would it matter whether his son, who was a teenager at the time, correctly or incorrectly remembers such a meaningless, insignificant detail?
Ask Willard, he's the one who put the lies in his big speech.
Strategic Vision Iowa Republican poll (12/21/07)
Mike Huckabee 31%
Mitt Romney 25%
Fred Thompson 16%
John McCain 8%
Rudy Giuliani 6%
Ron Paul 5%
Tom Tancredo 2% - this was before he dropped out
Duncan Hunter 1%
It is a fact that George Romney as an early and outspoken proponent of civil rights, and that he led civil rights marches in support of Dr. King, though not in his physical presence.
So why can’t Mitt just say that, admit that his memory might have been flawed, and carry on? The more he keeps this story alive, the more of his time is spent focusing on something fundamentally unimportant.
Politics lesson #1: When you find yourself in a hole, STOP DIGGING.
You all keep talking about the civil rights record of George Romney. Is George Romney running for President in 2007 or is it his son Myth? If it's Myth, then, I don't give a rat's a$$ about his father's record on civil rights. It's absolutely of no relevance now! We're looking at Myth's record - and it's flipped-flopped continuously over the years depending on what office he's running for.
George Romney had an exemplary civil rights record, and that’s the tradition in which Mitt was raised. Some folks have pointed to Mormon church teachings in an attempt to paint Mitt as a bigot, an attack I consider baseless.
That’s where the relevance of this story begins and ends. Why it persists — and why Mitt himself stupidly keeps it alive — is beyond me.
“Fred Thompson 16%”
This (SV 12/16 - 12/18) is the only poll having Fred in double-digits. Most recent polls have him..ready..3%!
See latest FR thread.
(The previous one was at 5%)
In other states: NH 3.2%. MI 6.5%. lol
Anyway, this SV poll was taken before Fred visited Iowa. Fred is gaining only when he is hiding from voters (worked well in the summer).
“Their own candidate is polling at 3% (!) in key states, no money and no plan.”
No. It is a fact. Most recent ARG poll has Fred at 3% in Iowa (previous was 5%). Other polls are similar (except one outlier SV before Fred went to Iowa).
In NH, he is at 3.2%. I propose you get used to it. He will drop out soon after Iowa and endorse his buddy McCain.