Actually, if it wasn’t for the fact that they lived where King marched, and at the time when King marched, it would very MUCH be an acceptable figure of speech.
There were Hundreds of Thousands of poeple who said they were “Marching with King”, ALL OVER THE COUNTRY, during the civil rights era. But since everybody knew MLK wasn’t in those places, we all KNEW what they meant.
In this case, Romney was SUPPOSED to march WITH MLK, IN PERSON, but turned it down because of his adherance to the Sabboth, and instead marched 6 days later in one of those “marches with MLK” that everybody was doing all over the country.
But somehow, through the years, the story became that he had actually been in the same march. Broder, Mitt, others all said things that made it sound literally true.
And until someone actually decided to check, nobody knew the difference. Including in all likelyhood, Mitt himself.
That's the most Clintonian spin yet. It's uncanny.
And yet, from his own personal memory, he "saw" his father marching with MLK.
It's not true. It never was true. And based on the fact that he revised his previous lie, he knew it wasn't true. But he went with it anyway, to make the event sound grander, when the simple truth would have served the same point and not have risked controversy.
Considering this all happened in the "vote for me or else you're a bigot, you slack-jawed evangelicals" speech, I guess I'm just a bigot for commenting on the lies.