Candidate Watch
Most Revealing Fibs: Mitt Romney

Speaking to students in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, November 2007.
"Obviously, my position did change with regards to life. But on other issues, my positions have been very consistent with my principles and my views."
--Mitt Romney, CBS "Face the nation," September 21, 2007.
Of all the candidates, both Republican and Democratic, the former Massachusetts governor is most vulnerable to the charge of being a "flip-flopper." He has attempted to immunize himself from this accusation by making a virtue out of necessity, and acknowledging his most blatant U-turn, on protecting the right to abortions. But an examination of his record shows that his positions have changed on a wide variety of other issues, from immigration to gay rights to gun control.
A few examples:
The recent discovery by the Boston Globe that illegal immigrants continued to mow his lawn a year after the matter was first brought to his attention opens him up to the the charge of hypocrisy.
Romney's positions on abortion have shifted more frequently than he cares to admit, hardening during the primaries as he went after Republican votes and moving to the center during the general election. To claim that his positions are "consistent with my principles and my views" is a tautology that conceals the deeper truth that his views and principles have a habit of changing with the political season.
It is also a stretch for Romney to claim that he lowered taxes while Governor of Massachusetts. See my post here.
The Pinocchio Test
It is still too early to rank the candidates in terms of their overall truthfulness. I have handed out Pinocchios to all the candidates for individual statements that seem at variance with the facts, but will give them a pass this week. Let me know any other areas where Romney has not been honest about his record.
Posted on December 10, 2007 at 6:00 AM ET
| Category:
Candidate Record, Candidate Watch, Economy, Immigration, Mitt Romney, Social Issues
Share This:
Technorati |
Tag in Del.icio.us |
Digg This |
What Are These Links?
Previous: Most Revealing Fibs: Hillary Clinton |
Next: Most Revealing Fibs: John Edwards
Posted by: timebanded | December 10, 2007 07:09 AM
Good for the Globe for doing a little fact-checking.
Of course, most people in Massachusetts have Romney's number by now. He spent a fair chunk of his term as governor positioning himself for the presidential run by bashing the state he was governor of. That's part of the reason Massachusetts now has our first Democratic governor in 16 years.
Posted by: Whippy | December 10, 2007 08:58 AM
Doesn't it make sense that in governing Massachusetts Romney would take into account the strong views and desires of the voters and not go against them ? He might believe one thing, but say that he would do another as governor because he is to be elected as a representative of the people ..
What everyone wanted thought was a competent leader for the fiscal situation ..
Posted by: Carl Loeber | December 10, 2007 10:00 AM
A better title would be "Rehash of Publicized Campaign Missteps and Opponent Criticisms"
Posted by: david | December 10, 2007 10:02 AM
Boring...there's nothing new here, and nothing that hasn't been publicized over and over again.
Posted by: Elbeau | December 10, 2007 10:13 AM
On Gay rights: In 1994 Romney was and still is an advocate of gay rights. At that time gay marriage was NOT an issue at all, but he was one of the very first politicians to fight gay marriage when the judge allowed it in MA. He still thinks gays should have rights, but that marriage is for only one man and one woman. He admits that he was apposed to the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy and thought it wouldn't work... but it has worked for this many years and shouldn't be fixed.
On Gun Laws: Romney was fighting against legalization of assult rifles in 2002. His argument (which is a valid one) was that assult rifles are used to commit crimes, not protect yourself or hunt with. He is highly in favor of the Right to Bear Arms and has shown this in his record.
On immigration: Romney was the FIRST to appose the immigration reform bill that McCain endorsed. Look that one up... he got a lot of initial criticism for being so against that bill in the start, until others jumped on the ban waggon. When you hire someone, or go wash your car, or go through the drive through... do you ask someone with a different accent for their green card? If Romney did that, we would be discussing how you think he discriminates against foreigners. He gave the business owner a chance and he blew it, so he fired the company. What else should he have done?
On abortion: This is the ONLY issue Romney has clearly changed his position on. He had a close relative die of an illegal abortion and it was hard for him to understand why abortion should be illigal. He ran in the most liberal state of the US and ran on a pro-choice platform. Ok...we all know this, right? Now let's look at his record while IN office. He vetoed EVERY pro-choice bill that came accross his desk. Every one!! When the first one came to him he had to make a choice to take a life or save one, and this was the first time in his life HE had to make that decision, and he chose LIFE.
Romney has been called a flip flopper by the media, but the fact of the matter is, he is a true consirvative and there are many out there that do not want him to be president and will do anything they can to make him look untrustworthy! END OF STORY!
Posted by: Rod | December 10, 2007 03:54 PM
You must remember these people are POLITICIANS. Lying comes as easily as breathing to them. You expect a snake to crawl on its belly. You expect a poli-tee-shun to lie, talk out of both sides of their mouth, bob and weave, evade the issues, say anything to get elected. I put politicians on the same level as used car salesmen, drug dealers, flim flam men.
Posted by: | December 10, 2007 03:58 PM
Romney is dishonest, and has a history of flip-flopping on important issues. The most telling would be on immigration, which as we speak is the focal point of negative ads being run against both Huckabee and McCain. It's truly shameful. The more the press exposes this guy, the more Americans are realizing he is NOT the candidate to be our next president. I look forward to the day he formally drops out of this race.
Posted by: Jason | December 10, 2007 08:26 PM
This isn't fact checking, it's parsing statements to create a hit-piece.
Posted by: bjalder26 | December 11, 2007 12:14 AM
If Romney loses his bid for the nomination....he can always go back to his former occupation....Yacht Salesman
Posted by: Rob | December 11, 2007 01:20 PM
Yacht salesman? Good call. Most people don't read enough to learn the facts. So, in many people's minds he might as well be a Yacht salesman (or elitist--as you'd love to mischacterise him). The left have already stated they fear him the most of all candidates. Why is that so? Romney's work as a Private equity/VC expertset a new presidence in that industry. Many refer to him as a legend. MSM will never refer to him in that way. It makes him sound less competent calling him a flip- flopper.
Ye shall know the truth and the truth... will make you mad--so just believe the lies.
Posted by: JonH | December 11, 2007 04:50 PM
Romney is exactly truthful regarding his statements and how they match to his principles. The problem is that the principle he holds most dear is "Say whatever is necessary to get the deal done." Truth has no objective value to Mitt. Getting elected is valued.
Posted by: | December 11, 2007 08:10 PM
Scrutiny. How many contributors to this blog could stand up to this kind of microscopic exam of their every eyeblink? Politicians are scumbags, agreed, but Romney has done a good job as Massachusetts governor, and can hold an intelligent conversation. He can even pronounce nuclear! We could do worse. I think I'll vote for him even if he white-lies now and then.
Posted by: Zaney | December 12, 2007 03:36 PM
Whether or not any of this is true, I have a different reason for not wanting to vote for him. During the Youtube debate, one question asked the candidates if they believed every word of the Bible. When it came to be his turn to answer, he paused, stuttered, and then gave a fairly plausible answer. He sounded like he was trying to think of the answer that would get him the most votes. That may have worked in MA, but it won't over the national scale.
Huckabee 08
Posted by: john | December 12, 2007 08:14 PM
john, why on earth would anyone ask a presidential candidate a question about Bible study? It's probably MORE of a disappointment that he acknowledged the question at all. What a waste of time.
Do seriously you anticipate that Congress is going to take up the issue of whether the Bible is to be believed during the upcoming term? If so, then I suppose this is a pivotal issue.
Posted by: Joe in Raleigh | December 13, 2007 10:14 AM
How about this one?
In the November 28th CNN/YouTube debate, Mitt Romney stated, "I took on a major issue, which was health care, found a way to get people health insurance without having to expand government, without having to raise taxes."
Talk about a whopper. In the $1.3 billion law, "Employers who don't provide insurance will pay an annual fee of $295 per full-time employee." (NPR) Additionally, those individuals rufusing to get health insurance have to pay a $219 fee.
If this isn't a 4 nose lie, I'm not sure what is.
Posted by: CWD | December 14, 2007 04:59 PM
He might believe one thing, but say that he would do another as governor because he is to be elected as a representative of the people ..What everyone wanted thought was a competent leader for the fiscal situation ..Posted by: Carl Loeber
That is the very definition of Hypocrisy. As Governor he is not a representative but the leadership. He pretends to be on the left to get the Mass governorship and now he pretends to on right to get the presidency. If we pull back the curtain, not sure what is really there.
Romney the Great America Poser
Posted by: Sky Pete | December 16, 2007 07:25 PM
Why does your paper have a special fact-checking section? What is the rest of the paper for?
Posted by: Joba | December 19, 2007 08:43 AM
good to see a candidate that can learn along the way. Seems Romney holds to his personal beliefs but doesn't feel it necessary to impose them on others via new laws or changes to old laws...at least most of the time. I'm ok w/that.
Posted by: | December 19, 2007 05:26 PM
Choosing your facts to fit your agenda makes your arguments just as true but false.
Just cause you won't fight to overturn an existing law that allows abortion does not make you pro-choice. Don't get confused by the labels.
Lowering taxes gets caught up in statistical interpretation, was it lower per capita, in total, for a given year, at a point in time, for a particular bill passed, does it include tax on gasoline?
I am also in favor of "gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly" in the military. But like Mitt it may not make sense to interfere with the "don't ask, don't tell policy." Must he change everything he doesn't agree with, is there a chance that others are more suitable for some decisions.
Can you support the NRA and gun reform? Sure, why not, I own guns but still would like handguns off our streets!
when it comes to pardons, I think we should let the judges judge and let the governors govern. We shouldn't have governors judging or judges governing! If you want to be found innocent of past wrongs...TALK TO THE JUDGE!
Posted by: Todd | December 19, 2007 05:48 PM
If anyone cares what Romney will do as president you can look at what he has done before .. what someone does is more important than what he says . .. what I hear from him .. heard from him in Massachusetts is him saying what he would do as governor .. he said that he would represent the wishes of the people in regard to abortion and gun policy .. to change what he will do for a different constituency is not hypocrisy to me ..
but don't take my word for it .. google "bork romney" .. listen to what Judge Bork said about Romney .. you think he supports the constitution ?
pick any issue .. and look at the type of folks who have endorsed him for president ..
every heard of Paul Weyrich ?
Posted by: Carl Loeber | January 4, 2008 10:30 AM
Post a Comment
We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.


One reason this country is in dire straights is because fact checking is not viewed as front page news.