By:
John Amato on Saturday, December 22nd, 2007 at 7:20 PM - PST
While trying to defend his weirdness over MLK a couple of days ago, Mitt Romney made it worse by saying this:
He added, “You know, I’m an English literature major as well. When we say, ‘I saw the Patriots win the World Series, it doesn’t necessarily mean you were there — excuse me, the Super Bowl. I saw my dad become president of American Motors. Did that mean you were there for the ceremony? No, it’s a figure of speech.”
No Trackbacks To “Quote of the Day“
69 Responses for “Quote of the Day”
Putz.
When I say I am going to vote this asshat, that does mean I’m really going to vote for this asshat.
so the nomination goes to the candidate who can torture the English language the most?
I’m confused. Mr. Double-Gitmo is for civil rights?
No the Patriots are for doubling gitmo. there.
So its cool for me to say, “I saw Mitt Romney’s campaign go up in flames.”
Wasn’t that the year Tiger Woods and the Yankees beat the Lakers in the Super Bowl?
do-si-do @ 3:
That’s how it went in 2000 and 2004. :D
Is this geek for real? ‘Just because I say something, doesn’t mean it’s true’…is what he’s really saying.
Misstatements aside, does he not understand the problem isn’t that he wasn’t physically there to see his father march with MLK isn’t the problem? I mean, I can say “I saw the moon landing” even though I wasn’t born when it happened. The problem isn’t whether or not he actually saw it, but whether it actually happened. And it appears that it did not. His father marching with MLK that is. The moon landing of course did happen.
Chris @ 8:
How charmingly naive!
Come on, be patriotic, George Romney was president of AMERICAN Motors!
So if I say I saw a crazy man walking down the street spouting he was running for President does that mean I saw him or did I just see him? Like was in my mind’s eye or was he there for real? Because I saw MLK on TV so did I see him? Or did I just see him? I am really confused here. If you could straighten this out for me I would be really grateful. And if I saw you I would thank you. But only if I saw you for real not metaphorically speaking of course.
Perhaps he saw it one day while walking in the woods, and an angel came down from heaven and showed him his Dad walking with MLK, and gave him an Uma and a Thurman and some gold vanity plates. Of course he was carrying a gun, being a lifelong hunter endorsed by the NRA.
Chris @ 8:
if you had said “i saw my father go to the moon” then that would have been a more correct analogy…
just like mittens romney ,youd be lying
Chris @ 8:
I know, because my father went to the moon with Neil Armstrong.
first of all, politicans should just not talk about sports.. ever.
secondly, the patriots would probably win the world series, unless it was against the red sox of course. :)
Next he’ll claim he was brainwashed about Iraq
What about…
Shouldn’t he have said, “Did that mean that I was there for the ceremony.”
English Lit. Major huh.
Romney just proved what Einstein said, “There are only two things that are infinite, the universe, and human stupidity and I’m not sure of the universe!
Forget Mitt’s MLK statement — Huckabee Claims His Father Marched With Martin Luther
..even tho I wasn’t there, I heard it on FOX NEWS!….oh my…
English lit major!?!? How in the world did he graguate?!?
To say “I saw my father march with Martin Luther King” is a figure of speech is only possible if your father did indeed march with Martin Luther King.
If he did not, then it is a lie. Another lie.
I hope Romney gets the Repulinut nomination. Then all of the Democratic nominees ads could just be clips of Romney contradicting himself and getting caught in these lies.
On the weird off-chance that Mitt is elected president, the best thing that could happen would be for us to convince him it was a figurative win, so he wouldn’t show up.
That wouldn’t stop him from going home and imagining he did.
It seems only fitting that the love child of MLK and Rosa Parks, who was driving the bus the day she was sitting in the back and got arrested, should at least figuratively win the presidency.
Don Davis @ 19:
And Mitt held the nails when Martin put the pronouncement on the church door.
Poor Mitt is word-parsing and logic-chopping as furiously as Bill Clinton did when he was in the special prosecutor’s interrogation vise. Doesn’t take much to set off old Mitt, now does it? [Link]
Oh Christ, now Fox News is claiming that they ‘Made’ Romney and Huckabee.
Not figuratively, literally.
They said they hired Dreamworks Animaton and asked them to fabricate ‘A couple of typical contenders for the republican presidential nomination’.
Well, Murdoch sure got his money’s worth.
And when the campaign’s over, he can jam them in a Mini and sell them to Ringling Brothers.
Mitt’s qualifications for the presidency are questionable.
But he way exceeds the requirements to be a Fox commentator.
Don’t sweat it, Mitt, you do have a future.
See? I knew I saw Tom Brady hit that home run over the Green Monster!
Go Pats!
I used to live in Massachusetts, born and raised there…trust me when I say it…Mitt Romney is the biggest doushebag running for President on either side right now. If this pandering, flip flopping prick gets elected President, he’ll do worse to the Constitution and our civil liberties in four years than what Bush has done in nearly eight! This man cannot be trusted and is the most vile of political opportunists!
The difference? The Patriots DID win the Super Bowl. Somebody’s dad DID become President of American Motors. Mitt’s dad did NOT march with Martin Luther King. End of Mitt Romney.
MittWitt just might be running against Hillary, Obama or Edwards next year.
Don’t ever discount the penchant for the Republican base to pretend to believe ANYTHING, ANY LIE, no matter how naked, in order to convince those around them that they’re voting for “truth, justice and the American way” in an election.
MittWitt hasn’t.
RichStraightWhiteAmericanMale @ 29:
From your lips to God’s ears….or at least to the ears of enough stupid fuckers that would otherwise vote for this phoney prick, thinking he’s actually somebody that should be entrusted with America’s interests!
If Mitt Romney were alone in the woods, would anyone hear the sound of his campaign crashing to the ground?
All joking aside, this is one dangerous lying fool who will do and say anything to win.
wisedup @ 20:
“Oh my” indeed! That’s a good one! FOX what?
mlv1055 @ 32:
Good question. And if Mitt were a hand, and had clap, would anyone hear him?
Spin, Spin, Sugar…
Well, that is about it for his campaign. Any male who mixes up the World Series and the Superbowl is obviously a Russian spy.
George (~Bush) @ 37:
ha! that’s it for me then, I didnt know the difference till he corrected it.
these statements do bring up musings of what other incredibly insane things he might say, like i dont know “the garden of eden is in montana, or was it wyoming?”, or “no, no, there’s nothing wrong with wearing magical underpants” or maybe “my sons serve the us by working on my campaign”.
to be honest i was sick of all the election nonsense the week after bush took office. that it is still going on is pathetic, at least there’s less than a year to go now. and a primary coming up to give it some credence. it certainly will be interesting to see what the hell the republicans do with their batch of losers.
Mittwitt really does think the voters are stupid.
Unfortunately, the evidence is in his favor.
*
Wow, talk about sleazy. He put it out there like his father was holding MLKs hand during the march. How can any republican support this guy? He stands for nothing. And Rudy is just downright corrupt. The Republicans, if they have any brains, will pick Huckabee.
Isn’t it funny hows the repiglican dumb-asses have to align themselves with famous liberals, liberal programs, and liberal positions - in order to validate themselves with the voters.
Mitwit doesn’t stand for anything. He has no values of his own. He might even be missing a few body parts.
*
Maybe we should change Willard’s nickname to “Zelig.” I understand that when he hangs out with his homies in the ghetto they call him “Why-T.”
If you claim that you “saw” an event you are identifying yourself as a witness to that event as it happened, in real time.
If upon further inspection it turns out you didn’t, that’s not a figure of speech.
It’s just a lie.
I don’t know exactly wat drugs the Mitt Man is on but I want some!
Goodness, Romney is such an embarrassment! Can’t he just say he was confused about childhood memories? Does he have to keep making up more complicated lies?
It’s the stuff of comedy gold, but politically, it’s what comes out of a sick dog.
jimbo92107 @ 45:
He could claim they were “childhood” memories except that he turned 13 in 1960, which made him a teenager. He was 16 in 1963 (when he allegedly marched with MLK) which made him old enough to drive, and 21 in 1968 when King was killed.
He was only 31 in 1978 when he claimed to have marched with his father and King, and since he claims he has always been a devout Mormon he can’t use the “I did drugs and can’t remember the 60’s” defense.
OTOH, “I can’t recall” has been an old standby defense for GOP members ever since the Reagan administration. Just ask our former Attorney General, uh . . .whatzisname.
Mitt’s an instant gratificationist. All he thinks about is the next minute. He doesn’t think about what will happen when he gets caught in a lie. He’s a 5 year old in a 60 year old man’s body
…Anyone done the “Oh! All this time, I thought he was a Mormon!” joke yet?
Happenstance @ 48:
You were the Frist.
What a mook.
Except the pecker head didn’t say that he saw his dad SEE MLK march…He said he saw his father marched WITH MLK. Which was false. So it doesn’t matter if it’s a figure of speech or not. His father never marched with MLK therefore he never saw his father march with MLK.
I’m glad to see people noticing this shit. Hopefully it means that we’re all awake now and won’t be taken for saps again.
If “Mitt the Lit Twit” had said, “I saw that the Patriots won the World Series,” he’d have been grammatically correct.
Of course, he’d still be wrong, but hey, he IS a Rethugliconn…
First, it now appears that Romney was factually correct, as others have come forward to corroborate his story.
Second, I can’t believe the nonsense being spewed over his use of the figurative ’saw.’ This usage is standard in the English language for many hundreds of years. According to my OED, “to know by observation (ocular and other), to witness; to meet with in the course of one’s experience; to have personal knowledge of, to be a contemporary of and present at the scene of (an event); to be living at (a certain period of time).” The earliest example of this usage dates to 1200 CE.
He may be a twit, but when it comes to lit, this group ain’t got it.
Thanks.
mp
Add this too by Maureen Dowd to the quote of the day:
“If voting for Obama is a roll of the dice, as Bill suggests, voting for Billary is a sure bet: an endless soap opera”.
December 23, 2007
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Savior or Saboteur?
By MAUREEN DOWD
WASHINGTON
Once it was about Hillary, but now, of course, it’s about Bill.
Our ubiquitous ex-president is playing his favorite uxorious game, and it goes like this: Let’s create chaos and then get out of it together. You ride to my rescue or I ride to yours. We come within an inch of dying and then recapture the day by the skin of our teeth. While we’re killing ourselves, we blame everyone else. We’ll be heroes.
It worked for Bill and Hillary in ’92 and ’96. It didn’t work in the health care debacle. Will it work in Iowa and New Hampshire?
Just when I thought I was out, the Clintons pull me back into their conjugal psychodrama.
Inside the Bill gang and the Hillary gang, there is panic and perplexity. Is Bill a loyal spouse or a subconscious saboteur?
Should Hillaryland muzzle him? Give him a minder? Is he rusty? Or is he freelancing because he relishes his role as head of the party his wife is trying to take over?
“For the first time since the Marc Rich pardon,” said a friend of the Clintons, “Bill is seriously diminishing his personal standing with the people closest to him.”
Certainly Bill wants to repay Hill for those traumatic times when he had to hide behind her skirt. And certainly he feels that his legacy is tied to her. He suggests to Matt Bai in today’s Times Magazine that she can be F.D.R. to his Teddy Roosevelt, getting through the ideas that fell flat the first time.
Is Bill torn between resentment of being second fiddle and gratification that Hillary can be first banana only with his help? Their relationship has always been a co-dependence between his charm and her discipline. But what if, as some of her advisers suggest, she turned out to be a tougher leader, quicker to grasp foreign policy, less skittish about using military power and more inspirational abroad? What if she were to use his mistakes as a reverse blueprint, like W. did with his dad?
When Bill gets slit-eyed, red-faced and finger-wagging in defense of her, is he really defending himself, ego in full bloom, against aspersions that Obama and Edwards cast on Clintonian politics?
Maybe the Boy Who Can’t Help Himself is simply engaging in his usual patterns of humiliating Hillary and lighting an exploding cigar when things are going well.
“They’re not Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, who had jealousy as the lifeblood of their marriage,” said one writer who has studied the pair. “The lifeblood of their marriage is crisis, coming to each other’s rescue.”
Bill is staying up late strategizing and recasting her message and speeches. But he’s off his game on the trail, making clumsy mistakes like his remark — bound to be shot down by Poppy Bush — that Hillary would send 41 and 42 around the world to restore pr