That's the mot juste a reader just proposed - for all those Romney statements that are just a little too good to be, you know, true. Remember Gore and the Internet. That kind of thing.

Mitticism: a noun. A slight exaggeration that embellishes the truth in order to impress voters. Pass it along.

(Actually, Chris Kelly may be the one to credit with this neologism).

Again this is not a big deal. Take the MLK issue. There's no question that George Romney was on the right side of the civil rights movement of his day (just as his son, sadly, is now on the wrong side of the civil rights movement of his day - after having been on the right side). Romney has every reason to be proud, and I have no doubt that he remembers his father's legacy vividly. It's also true, it now appears, that George Romney may have once actually marched alongside MLK, although that is still disputed and Romney himself is no longer insisting on its veracity. But Mitt didn't see it, as he now says. And the context of his prepared - not off-the-cuff - remarks clearly say that he did - not figuratively, but actually:

I was taught in my home to honor God and love my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King. I saw my parents provide compassionate care to others, in personal ways to people nearby, and in just as consequential ways in leading national volunteer movements.

The sentiment is clear and admirable, but slightly off. A Mitticism is not a lie as such, and I was too harsh in describing it as such originally. It's that extra-special edge to a salesman's pitch that is as unnecessary as it is counter-productive.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.