Mitt Romney once said in reference to misstatements by his Republican rival Rudy Giuliani, "Facts are stubborn things." But does he have his own problem with blurring the truth? After twice tripping up on some facts recently, it seems the former Massachusetts governor may be prone to exaggeration, taking what is essentially a kernel of truth and stretching it to bolster his case. For example:

ON MLK

WHAT HE SAID

"I saw my father march with Martin Luther King." -- "Faith in America" speech, Texas, Dec. 6

The facts

On Thursday, Romney explained that his use of the word "saw" was "a figure of speech." Romney said it was akin to him stating, "I saw my dad become president of American Motors." He told reporters in Iowa, "I wasn't there when he became president." Some publications have raised doubts that Romney's father ever marched with King, though he certainly was a civil rights advocate.

ON THE NRA

WHAT HE SAID

"... I received the endorsement of the NRA."-- NBC's "Meet the Press," Dec. 16

The facts

Romney argued that the group had done phone banks for him, but he conceded it did not formally endorse him. "Frankly, I didn't realize the NRA had an official endorsement program that was different than their phone-banking for me," Romney said on Thursday. "The fact that they phone-banked and encouraged their members to vote for me, I thought qualified for saying they had endorsed me."

ON HUNTING

WHAT HE SAID

There was the period in the spring when Romney talked about two hunting experiences while campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire, claiming that he had been a hunter "pretty much all my life."

The facts

After the notion was challenged by the Associated Press, Romney's campaign conceded there were only two instances he had been hunting in his life -- the two he described. Also, he did not have a hunting license or own a gun.

A HARDER LOOK

Indeed, with many of these instances, there has often been at least an element of truth in his claims. But for a candidate who has featured his business background and made much of his propensity for careful analysis of data, Romney is not always precise. Asked about it Thursday, he said he would correct whatever was wrong.

"There's going to be hyperscrutiny of each word," Romney said. "That's part of running for president. I'm up to it. You can look at the things I'm saying about my record and about the events of campaign and history, and you'll find if now and then I miss a word or I get something slightly off, I'll correct it, acknowledge where it's wrong. But the overall thrust, the overall meaning, of the story, is very accurate."

But the questions are especially sensitive for Romney, who is trying to rebound against rival Mike Huckabee in Iowa and maintain a lead in New Hampshire, the leadoff contests in the voting for presidential nominees.

Throughout his campaign, Romney has been dogged by allegations of flip-flopping on key issues, especially abortion rights, gun control and gay rights.

"It's the fine-tuning that's created the problem. It's always that one extra step that causes him the trouble," said Tobe Berkovitz, a longtime Romney observer and the interim dean of Boston University's College of Communication.

Romney, at least, is not alone. Democrat Al Gore faced similar questions during the 2000 campaign, when he falsely claimed to have accompanied a federal disaster relief official on a tour of a fire zone, and on previous occasions when he claimed more credit than many felt he warranted about the creation of the Internet, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the Love Canal toxic waste investigation.