Vandalia, Ohio (CNN) – Mitt Romney defended his campaign's television ads Tuesday, saying they've been "absolutely spot on," including ads deemed false by independent fact checkers.
"Anytime there's been anything that's amiss we correct it or remove it," Romney told CNN.
– Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker
– Check out the CNN Electoral Map and Calculator and game out your own strategy for November.
Ads from Romney's campaign have hammered President Barack Obama for supposedly "gutting welfare" by removing the work requirement from the federal assistance program.
An independent and non-partisan fact-checking organization, PolitiFact, rated the ad's claim as "Pants on Fire." CNN also rated the ad 'false." And the Obama campaign, the White House and former President Bill Clinton, who signed the original legislation into law, all attacked the Romney spot, saying the claims were false and misleading.
On Tuesday, Romney said those analyses were flawed.
"It has been shown time and again that the president's effort to take work requirement out of welfare is a calculated move, the same thing that he did in regard to food stamps," Romney said.
Pushed on the fact checks that claim Romney's ads are false, the GOP nominee maintained that Obama's administration was making a concerted move to remove work requirements from welfare.
"You look at the facts," Romney said. "Did he take the work requirement out of welfare?"
The Obama administration directive, issued July 12, allows individual states to experiment with changes to their welfare-to-work programs, which are federally funded. The intent, according to the directive, is to "challenge states to engage in a new round of innovation that seeks to find more effective mechanisms for helping families succeed in employment."
The welfare-to-work program affected by the directive – the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) – was created by the welfare reform law signed by Clinton in 1996. That measure was considered a win for conservatives, who long pushed for a provision that required work training for Americans receiving government assistance.
The Obama administration argues the potential changes would help people move quickly from welfare rolls to paying jobs by reducing burdensome requirements, including excessive paperwork.
Romney said Tuesday that argument was bogus.
"You always have the capacity to add work," Romney said. "There's never been a requirement that you can't have more work. The requirement that they're waiving was saying that people don't have to work to get welfare. That's the change that they proposed. I disagree with that direction."
"Taking work requirements out of government assistance is a very bad course to take and creates a culture of dependency," the Republican nominee concluded. "We help people who need help, we want to help people who need help, but the idea of removing work requirements I think is a mistake."
In Tuesday's interview, Romney also hammered Obama again for suggesting that recent events in the Middle East, including the killing of the American ambassador to Libya, were merely "bumps in the road."
"I'm not sure what developments in the Middle East he would consider bumps in the road," Romney said. "I consider the developments in the Middle East a very troubling course."
The GOP candidate also said Obama's wasn't treating Iran "like the pariah that they are," saying more could be done to prevent the nation from developing nuclear weapons.
This man is convinced of his own lies. That is more frightening than any of his plans for our economy or military.
C'mon - Politics has little or nothing to do with fact - Rather, it deals with base emotion ! !
Romney is a back seat driver without a clue where he is, or what an automobile is.
How can you take someone seriously when they believe if you say something which is false enough times it becomes true
Mittens you have my vote : )
Why don't any reporters ever hold Willard's feet to the fire?
Why don't they ever ask follow up questions and be aggressive with facts?
Why are there no real reporters anymore?
I Romney campaign is willing to continue their false, kind of makes one question what is the integrity of their other ads. Seems to be getting desperate if they are unwilling to correct it even if confronted by the independent body. Both parties need to stop inaccurate ads. It is an insult to the voters
Obama is allowing the states to legislate on the work requirement. Since when do republicans oppose allowing the states to legislate?
I will be very surprised someone doesn't take this guy out with a bullet. He has made more false claims against the people of the United States.. of lower class or in his words... less significant, than himself.. If he succeeds in becoming the next President, I seriously doubt he will last his full term.
I can not believe anyone really believes in his constant rhetoric against the current President. This man clearly needs a wake-up call.. In this reality he has higher stature than myself, and he can have it.. People with allot of money are typically so stuck up, twisted in their beliefs, its a wonder they can function in day to day life.
Romney is "spot-on" . . . . . AGAIN.
Twisting the truth seems to come easy to Gov Romney. His mean, vicious attack ads and intemperate statements have become part of his election repertoire. It is doubtful that many of the poorly paid workers in the businesses he so grandiosely claims to have "turned around" share his self-importance. Visit a Staples store, one of his flagship "achievements", and it's unlikely to find the same employees from one month to the next. His business models have obviously benefited him, his family the Mormon church and his cronies. It's doubtful that the USA or the world would benefit were he to become the president.
Grown ups don't act like this when they're caught lying, Mr. Romney. For that matter, it's wrong to lie to begin with. Maybe if you hadn't lived such a sheltered life you would have learned that somewhere along the way.
I am, quite franly, sick and tired of the GOP. Its exhausting getting upset at the hypocrisy. They have created a great divide in our government with their radical right ideas. (Romney has had to swing so far right he's proibably getting nose bleeds.) They want to gut all of our social systems. The politicans who populate their ranks are really, really uninformed, wackadoodles, and their policies have utterly failed this country (indeed, the world). Fine, so they are having a bad 30 year run, but do they then have to try to tell us that Obama's is a "failed presidency" (they MUST mean Bush), or that he is destroying medicare (they MUST mean themselves), or that Obama is a great divider (surely they MUST see the Tea Party's contribution to Washington gridlock - or the GOP's vow to make Obama a one term president by vote against EVERYTHING he tries todo to create jobs)? It is no less offensive than having to hear Amhadinejad of Iran say that he is against extremism. ARE YOU KIDDING?????
If he wants voters to listen to his ads, he must release his ten years tax returns. Trust is a perquisite for leadership.
Whatever Romney is bickering about, it's still a far cry from "gutting welfare". Besides, Romney in his private carreer has created many welfare recipients so you could probably say he's somewhat of an expert in the field....
This is not difficult to understand.
The initiative allows for alternative programs in lieu of the work requirement, with a waiver. This is clear cut. With this waiver, it is possible to get welfare without the work requirement. As such, the simplest of formal logic concludes that the work "requirement" would no longer be a necessary condition to receive benefits. Thus, Romneys claims are actually accurate. Sorry politifact.
While it may not sound like a nice conclusion for Obama or the Democrats, Romney did not lie or come to some improper conclusion. (Bear in mind that Romney did overstep on Obama's alleged intent when drafting the initiative.)
Money can buy air time and sell a lie. Say it again and again until the lie becomes the truth to those who are willing to believe the worst about our president without checking the facts– big money wants to buy this election because they want to take over our country, buy our country.
THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT GREED, STUPID!,
Well, of course Romney wouldn't, couldn't lie! He just twists the truth when he can't completely turn away from facts because it's his and Anne's TURN to reside in the White House,...not that YOU PEOPLE would understand anything like that!
Romney shows his inexperience by criticizing the president about being soft on Iran. No president since 1979 has dealt with Iran publically at same rhetoric level as they've hammered the West with. You could make the case the only one to actually do anything was Carter, even though his attempt to free the hostages failed and probably paved Reagan's path to the WH. Reagan actually did business with Iran even though he knew they were supporting the terririst cells holding the many Western hostages in the Lebanon and elsewhere. Not the proudest GOP moment in foreign policy matters.
Why does the bulk of this article rely on the false balance of a back-and-forth between Romney and Obama? What we clearly have here is a case of Romney vs. reality. Whatever the Obama administration has to say about Romney's claims should only be a line or two here. Let the truth speak for itself.
Why is this a surprise? Romney lies. Ryan lies. They both lie about their lying. Yet, a number of people seem to prefer believing the lies rather than admit an error in judgement for initally supporting these two.
We can sure tell that Romney has become a seasoned politician. I mean, how many ordinary citizens could take a bold faced lie, then justify that lie with another bold face lie, thinking putting two lies together make a truth.
I'm used to the politics of exaggeration, but Romney has taken lying and made it an art-form.
It seems every time Romney or Ryan open their mouth they lose credibility.
Mitt couldn't fact the "facts" if he stood in front of the world's largest dictionary and went to the "facts" definition.
The requirement is only WAIVED if that state comes up with a plan showing there is potential to more effectively move people off welfare. And if and only if the state wants to remove the requirement. So technically he didn't get rid of the requirement he left it up to the states. IF the states method does not improve overall welfare usage then the work mandate is re-instated. Correct? How does Romney even remotely see himself as right?
What do you expect Romney to say? Those are just some of the lies we created to mislead people into voting for us, I pay good money to creative people to make up these lies. That's called job creation. If I stopped, I'd be putting some very creative people out of work, and I'm all about putting people to work.