Romney: I Was “Completely Wrong” When I Made The ’47 Percent’ Comments

Too little, too late?

Just over two weeks after a video was released showing Mitt Romney talking to a group of high-powered donors in Florida and saying that he “didn’t need to worry about” the 47 percent of the American public that was depending on government and would vote for the President anyway, the former Massachusetts Governor is apologizing for his remarks and saying that he was wrong to say them: 

Mitt Romney came full circle on his “47 percent” remarks Thursday night, calling them “just completely wrong” in an interview on Fox News.

When asked by host Sean Hannity what he would have said if President Barack Obama had brought up the controversial comments in the first presidential debate, the Republican nominee said that such stumbles happen while campaigning, and “in this case, I said something that’s just completely wrong.”

Echoing a line he had used previously to mitigate the remarks’ fallout, Romney told Hannity that he cares about the “100 percent.”

“I absolutely believe, however, that my life has shown that I care about 100 percent and that’s been demonstrated throughout my life,” Romney said. “And this whole campaign is about the 100 percent. When I become president it will be about helping the 100 percent.”

Previously Romney had said his remarks, surreptitiously recorded during a private fundraiser in May, were not “elegantly stated.” They included the comments that “47 percent” of  voters are dependent upon government and do not pay income tax.

Many commentators on the left and right expressed surprise that Obama didn’t broach the subject during Wednesday night’s debate. On The O’Reilly Factor Thursday, conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer called the omission “shocking.”

Here’s the video:

It seems rather obvious that this is a response that Romney and his advisers had prepared in advance of Wednesday night’s debate in anticipation that the President would bring the comments up. Quite honestly, I think everyone figured that the President was going to bring the comments up. After all, his campaign has been hitting Romney over the head with his own words for the past two weeks in a series of ads that have run virtually non-stop in swing states like Ohio, Florida, and Virginia and Obama surrogates have been bringing it up at every opportunity. The fact that he didn’t even though there were more than one occasions during the debate when he could have, was really rather surprising. Romney’s response would have certainly an interesting moment, because it’s no often that you hear a politician say they were wrong in a debate, much less someone like Mitt Romney who has frequently seemed loath to admit error even when it’s rather obvious. Indeed, as Connor Simpson notes at The Atlantic, it was a long journey for Romney from his initial statement about the comments to what he said last night. Why he didn’t get to this point sooner is something I don’t really understand.

Daniel Larison isn’t very impressed:

Romney shouldn’t get much credit for acknowledging what most people already knew several weeks ago, but he should get a little. One of the ongoing flaws in the Romney campaign is not just the tendency to make important errors, but its stubborn refusal to own up to those errors. The campaign has continued defending Romney’s blunders weeks or months later when a quick correction would have been far more effective in putting the issue to rest.

Of course, Romney is trying to make up for lost time and to repair damage that his 47% comments caused. The real question is: why did he wait until now? It would have been much easier to repudiate his comments from the video weeks ago and minimize the damage they have caused. Doing so now makes Romney seem as opportunistic as ever. It is only after the damage has been done and he realizes that the comments are dragging him down that he casts them aside.

I tend to agree for the most part. Ideally, Romney should have been saying something like this as soon as the videotape was released. The American people tend to be somewhat forgiving of politicians who admit they were wrong, after all. At the same time, I return to the fact that I’m fairly certain that this was a statement that the campaign had readied for what they anticipated would be  an inevitable hit on the remarks from the President during the debate. In those circumstances, with a huge national audience watching, I can perhaps see the logic in wanting to get the issue behind you while the maximum possible audience is watching does make some sense. Since Obama didn’t bring the question up, though, the campaign likely decided to just get the statement out there while they were still riding the public relations high from the debate.

Given the fact that they’ve waited almost three weeks to say something like this, though, I’m not sure it’s going to make up for any of the damage that the remarks have likely caused to Romney in states like Ohio. Moreover, the Obama campaign isn’t exactly going to stop running their 47 percent ads regardless of what Romney says now. So, I tend to have my doubts that this is going to really have much of an impact on the race at all.

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2012, US Politics,
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Al says:

    I doubt his sincerity.




    0



    0
  2. Rob in CT says:

    Etch-A-Sketch, baby!

    The move to the center continues.

    I’d give him some credit for admitting the obvious, but I can’t because his initial response was to double-down. Only after that clearly didn’t work did he finally go this route.

    I wonder, how do the various commentors who defended his initial statement and response feel now?




    0



    0
  3. LaMont says:

    @Al:

    Very easy to do. The fact that Romney said what he said behind closed doors and got caught makes him lose all credibility.




    0



    0
  4. Markey says:

    I predict another “shocking” secret video of Obama will be on Fox tonight to distract the drop of un-employment to 7.8% report that just got released.




    0



    0
  5. Rob in CT says:

    For what it’s worth, I think there is a decent chance that what Romney said “behind closed doors” was simply him pandering to his audience of rich donors rather than something he absolutely believed. There’s also a decent chance he meant it, because in a bubble even smart people can come to believe silly things. I simply don’t know.

    I also do not care.




    0



    0
  6. James in LA says:

    The tone in his voice during his Dinner Theater Experience cannot be “moved to the center,” sorry. He was contemptuous and no amount of make-up is going to cover that zit.




    0



    0
  7. LaMont says:

    @Rob in CT:

    There’s also a decent chance he meant it, because in a bubble even smart people can come to believe silly things.

    Given the political context before this went down – that is exactly the problem Romney has had to deal with. Which do you think the majority of the people will believe? Answer – the latter, which is devastating to MItt.




    0



    0
  8. Me Me Me says:

    You all know what two words I am going to type next:

    Brain. Damage.




    0



    0
  9. C. Clavin says:

    I’ll take the guy at his word that he realizes he was wrong, and it’s not just a reaction to poll numbers showing that it is really hurting him….especially in places like Ohio.
    The question is if he is going to address the issue with the entire Republican party…to the talk radio buffoons, and right-wing bloggers, and plain ol’ low-information humans like Jan? It’s not like Romney invented this meme…it’s been ratlling around the small cranial cavaties of Republicans for a long time.
    In that closed door fundraiser he was just repeating what he thought his donors wanted to hear.
    Of course he’s not doing that now…now he’s being honest.




    0



    0
  10. legion says:

    This is classic Romney campaign “damage control” – it makes the other side choose something else to hit him over and the delay gives the candidate’s ego time to adjust to actual saying the words “I was wrong”, but it’s waaaaaaaay too late to actually prevent any damage in theeys of the voters. Total amateurs.




    0



    0
  11. grumpy realist says:

    Which then begs the question: if that was such a perfectly wrong comment, then why did you say it?

    (I don’t believe Mitt’s “explanation”, either. Considering how comfortable he looks in the initial video, I think we’re seeing the “real” Mitt Romney. He’s only comfortable when surrounded by other rich white males. )




    0



    0
  12. KRM says:

    I don’t know why its such a surprise that Obama did not broach the subject of the “47%” comment during the debate. First of all, although Romney’s comment makes great campaign ad fodder, it hardly rises to presidential debate material, and bringing it up would hae made Obama look incredibly small. Second, why would Obama want to have given Romney a chance to explain his remarks to 50 million people? Mitt could have said “You know, I was was wrong to saw that, but I wasn’t wrong about the rise in government spending under your administration blah blah blah…” No, I think Obama was wise (politically) to avoid the topic in a debate and let his campaign ads keep it before the public. Romney, on the other hand, should have either stood by his statement or repudiated long ago. Worst campaigner ever? Nah. But close.




    0



    0
  13. Jeremy R. says:

    I return to the fact that I’m fairly certain that this was a statement that the campaign had readied for what they anticipated would be an inevitable hit on the remarks from the President during the debate. In those circumstances, with a huge national audience watching, I can perhaps see the logic in wanting to get the issue behind you while the maximum possible audience is watching does make some sense. Since Obama didn’t bring the question up, though, the campaign likely decided to just get the statement out there while they were still riding the public relations high from the debate.

    Yeah, I bet his team was disappointed in not being able to get that soundbite out during the debate, to an audience of 50m or whatever. Living in a swing state, it would be hard to overstate how frequently I see that ad that consists simply of his words playing and the clinking of cutlery on dinner plates. Hannity likely was asked to raise the issue.




    0



    0
  14. pylon says:

    The 47% remark is much more damaging to Romney when it comes out of his mouth via ads with the clip than if Obama attacked him for it in th debate, which would make him look petty and small.




    0



    0
  15. HelloWorld! says:

    What a flake. When we say something we are responsible for those comments. I am surprised the democrats have not gotten the footage from the 2008 RNC convension, where he hopped up on stage and went on a rant about liberals and people who are sucking the system dry. I was watching it with republican staffer friends of mine who all cringed and said “Oh Mitt, you’ll never be able to run again”.




    0



    0
  16. jukeboxgrad says:

    doug:

    the former Massachusetts Governor is apologizing for his remarks

    Nope. This is not what a real apology looks like. Maybe not quite as bad as various other political non-apologies, but still not a real apology.

    To begin with, a real apology needs to include something like this: ‘I’m sorry I hurt you.’




    0



    0
  17. Fiona says:

    Ditto what KRM said. I was surprised to see a whole bunch of commentators lamenting the fact that Obama didn’t bring up the 47 percent comment. Personally, I was relieved that he didn’t because it would have made him look petty and would have given Mitt the opportunity to stare into the camera, give his best imitation of sincerity, and offer up his heartfelt mea culpa. How then could Obama respond? By saying, aw Mitt you really don’t mean it? It would be a total no-win situation for the president.

    Moreover, whatever mileage he was going to get from the comments has already been gotten through some pretty devastating campaign ads and through the widespread dissemination of the clip on the media. That Mitt had to go before sycophant Sean Hannity to make his apology is pretty telling. It’s not as if Hannity is going to hold his feet to the fire or be anything less than fawning.

    Romney’s apology, coming when it does, it too little, too late to contain the damage. Or to convince anyone not already convinced of his sincerity.




    0



    0
  18. Facebones says:

    If it was so wrong, then why didn’t he say so three weeks ago? Why did he say it was “inartfully worded” but accurate? More likely he tried to own his remarks because his advisors and Fox News said it would be good for him to do so and put all those moochers on notice.

    Now, after that tactic got him killed in the polls, he’s saying it was wrong.

    Bull. Crap. Yet another example of the man without convictions, willing to say or do anything to get elected.




    0



    0
  19. Ed in NJ says:

    For all the criticisms of Obama in the debate, one thing that is becoming clear is that Obama was not going to give him an audience to walk back those comments. That’s why he was reduced to going on Hannity. But why bring it up at all? It’s a political loser, especially when his lunatic base feels he’s right to say it?

    This campaign is really boxed into a corner. Romney is trying to move to the center by basically saying the opposite of everything he’s said up until now. It’s a short term gain in the news cycle, while the lasting image is all the lies and firing Big Bird. Just an inept campaign.




    0



    0
  20. ernieyeball says:

    Maybe the President did not give Mr. Romney the opportunity to repudiate the 47% gaffe Wednesday night because it was a nationwide audience.
    Why let Mitt beg forgivness in front of 67.2 million citizens?
    I suspect the number of members in Hannity’s choir isn’t quite that high.




    0



    0
  21. MattT says:

    At the start of the next debate Obama should just turn to face Romney and ask: “So, who are you tonight?”




    0



    0
  22. Curtis says:

    Romney of course had this statement ready to go, which is why Obama didn’t bring it up in the debate. Why give him a chance to make his mea culpa in front of 67 million people? It never even occurred to me that Obama would bring this up in the debate. Let the ads pummel him.




    0



    0
  23. Geek, Esq. says:

    From his press conference on September 18:

    Well, you know, it’s not elegantly stated, let me put it that way. I’m speaking off the cuff in response to a question and I’m sure I could state it more clearly in a more effective way than I did in a setting like that. And so I’m sure I’ll point that out as time goes on. But we don’t even have the question given the snippet there nor the full response, and i hope the person who has the video would pul put out the full material. But it’s a message which I’m going to carry and continue to carry which is look. The president’s approach is attractive to people who are not paying taxes because, frankly, my discussion about lowering taxes isn’t as attractive to them and therefore I’m not likely to draw them into my campaign as effectively to those in the middle. This is a discussion about the political process of winning the election. And of course I want to help all americans, all americans have a great and prosperous future. And I’m convinced that the president’s approach has not done that and will not do that.

    Contemptible fraud.




    0



    0
  24. Murray says:

    “Too little, too late?”

    Possibly, but seems synchronized with Romney’s debate persona.

    We’ll see in the next few weeks if he goes full blast Mitt ‘Massachusetts Governor’ Romney until election day as opposed to Mitt ‘Bain Capital’ Romney he went for in the primaries.




    0



    0
  25. jukeboxgrad says:

    Geek, that’s excellent. Mitt, 9/18:

    I’m sure I could state it more clearly in a more effective way … But it’s a message which I’m going to carry and continue to carry

    Mitt, 10/5:

    I said something that’s just completely wrong

    By “continue to carry” he meant ‘continue to carry for a period definitely not to exceed 16 days.’ With Quantum Mitt Romney, you always have to read the fine print.




    0



    0
  26. jukeboxgrad says:

    ernieyeball:

    I suspect the number of members in Hannity’s choir isn’t quite that high.

    Yes, and it’s the wrong audience. Ads like this are killing Mitt with certain important blocs of voters who are probably not watching Sean. (Details about those blocs, including TV shows they watch, here.)

    I bet it was a major disappointment to Mitt that Obama didn’t give Mitt a chance to deliver his ‘apology’ to a huge audience. And now he’s stuck, because he can’t really use his Sean clip in an ad. He missed his best chance to say it to a big audience.




    0



    0
  27. mannning says:

    Romney apologized. He admitted that he was wrong. For most decent Americans that should be enough to shove it down the memory hole. Or should we continue to remember all the gaffes of both Romney and Obama, such as Obama’s 57 states remark? I vote to give them a pass.

    Why, anyway, most street liberals know there are at least 48 and not nearly 57 states, and I thought Obama was a dyed-in-the-wool street liberal that would come a lot closer to the right number. Was he counting Northern California, Central California, Northern Texas, Central Texas, Western Texas, and then North and South Nevada, and East and West Alaska perhaps? Is this set of divisions in his plans after reelection, and he simply slipped up and divulged his plans early on? Hmmm, 14 more senators…




    0



    0
  28. grumpy realist says:

    @mannning: The only reason you can call this a “gaffe” is because Mitt revealed who he really is. Look at the video again. Look at how relaxed he is by comparison to his usual demeanour out in front of the great unwashed. His body language, his voice, his expressions–all of these indicate that this is an audience he feels comfortable to be in front of. They are “his” people.

    In which case, those remarks about the 47% are, sadly, not a pander. That’s what Mitt Romney actually believes.




    0



    0
  29. grumpy realist says:

    @mannning: Oh, and about that apology? I don’t believe a word of it. He’s only coming out with it because he got caught and he’s discovered it’s wrecking havoc with his election chances.

    What evidence do you have that Mitt Romney actually believes that he is “for 100% of the people”? Given how many times he’s flip-flopped, why shouldn’t we interpret this as just one more case of telling the marks what they want to hear?




    0



    0
  30. Liberal Capitalist says:

    so·ci·o·path
    [soh-see-uh-path, soh-shee-]

    noun Psychiatry . A person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

    Profile of the Sociopath
    This summarizes some of the common features of descriptions of the behavior of sociopaths.

    Glibness and Superficial Charm

    Manipulative and Conning
    They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.

    Grandiose Sense of Self
    Feels entitled to certain things as “their right.”

    Pathological Lying
    Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.

    Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
    A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.

    Shallow Emotions
    When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.

    Incapacity for Love

    Need for Stimulation
    Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.

    Callousness/Lack of Empathy
    Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others’ feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.

    Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
    Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.

    Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
    Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet “gets by” by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.

    Irresponsibility/Unreliability
    Not concerned about wrecking others’ lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.

    Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
    Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all sorts.

    Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
    Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.

    Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
    Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Other Related Qualities:

    Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
    Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
    Authoritarian
    Secretive
    Paranoid
    Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
    Conventional appearance
    Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
    Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim’s life
    Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim’s affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
    Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
    Incapable of real human attachment to another
    Unable to feel remorse or guilt
    Extreme narcissism and grandiose
    May state readily that their goal is to rule the world

    (The above traits are based on the psychopathy checklists of H. Cleckley and R. Hare.)




    0



    0
  31. OzarkHillbilly says:

    “I absolutely believe, however, that my life has shown that I care about 100 percent and that’s been demonstrated throughout my life,” Romney said.

    I wonder, was Romney “caring” about them when he was outsourcing their jobs to China?




    0



    0
  32. Liberal Capitalist says:

    .
    … Just sayin’.

    Your choice.




    0



    0
  33. An Interested Party says:

    @mannning: Nice try, but what Romney said wasn’t simply a gaffe or a misstatement…the proof is in how devastating the ads that include this are…an ad about 57 states would mean nothing and go no where…




    0



    0
  34. C. Clavin says:

    Manning wants to compare Romney repeating a right-wing meme and tossing off nearly half the country…mostly the sick and the poor and the elderly…with Obama mis-speaking and saying there are 57 states.
    Indescribably stupid.




    0



    0
  35. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Liberal Capitalist: Have you met my ex? Cause you just described her to a tee.




    0



    0
  36. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: And yes, I have noticed the similarities between her and Mitt.




    0



    0
  37. Tsar Nicholas says:

    I liked the “47%” comment. I can understand, however, why it caused so much twitching and foaming at the mouths on the left side of the spectrum.

    Politically speaking I can understand why Romney is walking this item back. There are a lot of Zombiebots out there in TV Land and their votes count too.

    Eventually, however, despite the left residing on Planet Unicorn-Prime, we’re going to have to have that discussion. When about half the populace pays zero net federal income taxes, well, sorry, Houston, but we’ve got a problem. As one noted philosopher, perhaps Ben Franklin, perhaps someone else, so aptly opined:

    A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.

    Whomever said that wasn’t just whistling Dixie. And now we’re whistling past the graveyard…..




    0



    0
  38. sam says:

    @ernieyeball:

    Maybe the President did not give Mr. Romney the opportunity to repudiate the 47% gaffe Wednesday night because it was a nationwide audience.

    Nah. it was a missed opportunity.

    Lerher: So, Gov. Romney, about the 47% remark.

    Romney: I’m glad you brought that up, Jim. I’d like to say right now that I was 100% wrong. …

    Obama: So, you were just blowing smoke up those fatcat fat asses so they would shell out for your campaign?




    0



    0
  39. PJ says:

    @OzarkHillbilly:

    I wonder, was Romney “caring” about them when he was outsourcing their jobs to China?

    When Romney said that he “liked to fire people”, what he actually meant was that he fired them out of love.




    0



    0
  40. Moosebreath says:

    @OzarkHillbilly:

    They both wear their hair slicked back and are going gray at the temples?




    0



    0
  41. mannning says:

    Hold on, guys, we have a nice list of Obama gaffes to bring out, should it be warranted, and, of course, I suspect neither meant to do any harm to people as attempted to be hung on Romney. It is likewise incredibly stupid to make such attempts and raise it on high when it was mispoke and apologized for in the bargain. But then that is the liberal mind at work trying to make a cake out of nails, or is it the other way round?




    0



    0
  42. PJ says:

    @mannning:
    Once again, this isn’t comparable to a gaffe.

    This isn’t “57 states”, “I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully” or any other stupid gaffe.

    And, no, he didn’t misspoke.

    He didn’t “apologize” when the video first appeared, he “apologized” after the campaign finally understood the damage done by the video.




    0



    0
  43. mannning says:

    @Liberal Capitalist:

    A rather complete description of the President, I’d say. Bravo!




    0



    0
  44. mannning says:

    @grumpy realist:

    You have the right to believe what you want, even if it is biased and uncharitable, as are many of the commenters here on this subject. It is quite possible that Romney had not heard any more about those remarks until it hit the media, and didn’t realize the scramble he made. And scramble it was. It is one thing to forgive a gaffe or misspoke; it is quite another to ignore or paste over four years of lies, broken promises, and subterfuges we have been treated to by Obama.Tell me again that federal money will not be used to pay for abortions.




    0



    0
  45. Herb says:

    @mannning:

    “Tell me again that federal money will not be used to pay for abortions.”

    Not so sure about that one, but I can guarantee it will be used to kill some brown people in the middle east. Does that help?




    0



    0
  46. Mr. Replica says:

    Trying to compare the 57 states gaffe to the 47% debacle is hilarious. Really.
    A statement made by the president in which he in no way looked down on anyone, or called any victims, nor swatted away a large percentage of people as unworthy, IS OBVIOUSLY just like Romney’s remarks where he did ALL those things.
    OF COURSE! how stupid of me not to see this connection before.
    By all means, lets just stop talking about the 47% remark it’s obviously a wash when matched up against the 57 states gaffe.
    Maybe we now we can discuss how the mispronunciation of corpsman is exactly like Akin’s remark that legitimate rape victims have ways to try to shut that whole thing down. I mean it’s obviously the same thing, and no one should be talking about either of them.

    As far as the thread topic. When you have to go on to Hannity of all places to “apologize”, then in reality, you are trying to make sure the smallest audience possible hears it. It was a calculated move by Romney. He knows Hannity’s audience is already going to believe anything he says, and that Hannity would not press him on the matter. Safe answer for a safe environment.




    0



    0
  47. The Q says:

    Well it is great that we have in writing that noted compassionate humanitarian Manning who pleads that we overlook a “gaffe” by being forgiving and not pettyfog the issue.

    So when the inevitable hysterical Manning diatribe about some Obama policy or misstep occurs in the future, we can throw back to this doosh his own words which he will disavow faster than Mitt backtracked on his own words.

    I guarantee it.




    0



    0
  48. jukeboxgrad says:

    replica:

    Trying to compare the 57 states gaffe to the 47% debacle is hilarious.

    Yes, especially because the former has a simple explanation. Snopes:

    He was trying to express the thought that in all the time he had spent on the campaign trail so far in 2007-08, he had visited all (48) of the states in the continental U.S. save for one (i.e., “one left to go,” excluding Alaska and Hawaii), but in his weariness he slipped up and started off with “fifty” instead of “forty.” (Note the long pause in the video clip between the words “fifty” and “seven.”)

    Not complicated, and not significant in any way.

    Maybe we now we can discuss how the mispronunciation of corpsman is exactly like Akin’s remark that legitimate rape victims have ways to try to shut that whole thing down. I mean it’s obviously the same thing, and no one should be talking about either of them.

    Yes, and they’re also trying to make 4 deaths in Libya seem more horrifying than 2,753 deaths in lower Manhattan, or 299 deaths in Beirut on 10/23/83.




    0



    0
  49. Mr. Replica says:

    jukeboxgrad:

    Pfft, context is highly overrated. Only fancy, out-of-touch elitists rely on context.




    0



    0
  50. jukeboxgrad says:

    Context is a communist plot. I happen to know that the entire concept of context was personally invented by Alinsky.




    0



    0
  51. Mr. Replica says:

    jukeboxgrad:

    Really? I thought it was Lenin?
    Hmm, the more you know.
    SMH




    0



    0
  52. wr says:

    @mannning: That has to be the most pathetic attempt to change the subject I have ever seen on this blog — and I’ve suffered through years of Jenos and Jay and Hoot and all his other sockpuppets.




    0



    0
  53. john personna says:

    Very funny:

    Use the RoboRomney service to fill in your positions on issues from abortion to the economy to gun-control, and the system will mine a database of real Romney quotes to produce a position paper in which the candidate agrees with everything you say.




    0



    0
  54. LC says:

    Like most public apologies, this one is bogus. Mitt is sorry he was caught, not for what he said..

    Calling it an “error” that has now been rectified is nothing bu pure cynicism.




    0



    0