George W. Romney’s Franken-Son: Mitt & His ‘Noble’ Lies

Mitt is an admixture of lies and deceit. Chief among these is the dissimulation of the idea led by his wife, Ann, that Mitt is a sterling example of the nobility of his father a Moderate and highly respected Republican governor of Michigan. A man of highest character whom Mitt is channeling as he desperately seeks the American Presidency. Nothing could be further from the truth than the claim that Mitt is morally qualified to be the U.S. Commander-in-chief and chief executive.

George W. Romney Campaigning (Dayton Daily Archives 1968)

Wife Ann has been crisscrossing the country with her new strategy, harkening back to Mitt’s father, George W. Romney, in a vain attempt try to connect Mitt to the reasonable and moderate stances that his father took while governor of Michigan back in the 1960’s, and thus wash away the stains of Mitt’s groveling at the feet of the Tea Party insurgency. So endeared and enamored is Mitt to his father that Ann felt compelled to reveal that often when Mitt takes the speakers stand he pens on a paper the word “Dad.” This is very touching but completely misleading, Mitt is nothing at all like his famous and revered dad.

Ever in the Shadow of Dear-old Dad: Mitt Romney holds up a campaign poster of his father George Romney while on the trail in Michigan (October 2012)

Mitt is a monster manipulator and striver, who will do anything, say anything to be elected.  

Knitting Together the Mitt Monster
Mitt Romney has shown himself to be a kind of Frankenstein in the service of the Hard Right both ideologically and religiously. His powerful backers are holding their noses yet totally intent upon his success in winning on November 6th. Radical Republicans and Corporatists are willing to take the desperate chance that they can achieve their long sought goals through Mitt’s compliance and malleability in order to regain and reassemble the power and prestige they lost under the grand failure of another favored son of privilege, George W. Bush. But at what cost to the nation this charade, this dark deception? It is time to entertain fear of the cabal in the backrooms of K Street and religious oligarchy.

Presented to the American public as a man of “rock solid” character, benevolence, and mainstream values and moderate political goals, Mitt Romney has fallen fall short of that depiction. As one has said “as a candidate campaigns, so shall he govern.”

The turbulent torrent of lies, misstatements, crude pronouncements immediately followed by misleading/ineffective “apologies” or next day corrections has marked Mitt’s long, long pilgrimage toward the nation’s highest office.

Romney is the ultimate “etch-a-sketch” creature, created in the PR labs, Frank Luntz’s focus groups, and the think tanks of the most dangerous and aggressive corporatists of our times—a heartless, lifeless, assemblage of images and bumper sticker sayings—the perfect Frankenstein candidate. As Grover Norquist quipped, "we just want a man in the White House who will dutifully sign" (rubber stamp) any or all legislation or vetoes we put in front of him.

What do they want? A robotic bureaucrat who serves at the will of his backers and handlers, not a man of moral courage and sterling meddle as was George Romney his legendary father, a man of iron will, strong convictions, and unbending principles.  

George Romney’s Aide Speaks Out: Mitt’s Father’s Right-hand Man’s Memo
Earlier this month, Walt De Vies a former aide to George Romney, delivered a letter that compared Mitt Romney, with his father George W. Romney which he dlevered to a number of journalists and reporters, one of them was at the New York Times:

A longtime aide to George W. Romney issued a harshly worded critique of Mitt Romney, accusing him of shifting political positions in “erratic and startling ways” and failing to live up to the distinguished record of his father [George Romney], the former governor of Michigan.

(Break)

In a telephone interview, he said he was motivated to write the essay by “an accumulation” of Mr. Romney’s actions, like his comment about 47 percent of Americans and his decision to campaign with Donald Trump. Mr. De Vries said he was annoyed by Mr. Romney’s repeated references recently to his father as inspiration and influence on him.

“I just don’t see it”. “Where is it? Is it on issues, no? On the way he campaigns? No.” [De Vies] said.
(Emphasis Added)

More from the Essay by Walt De Vries on George Romney vs Mitt Romney:

George Romney’s strength as a politician and public officeholder was his ability and determination to develop and hold consistent policy positions over his life. While it seems that Mitt would say and do anything to close a deal – or an election.

George Romney’s constant mantra to those in and around his campaigns and his gubernatorial staff: “As you campaign, so shall you govern.”

(Break)

George Romney reached out to voters in union halls and factory gates, a rare venue for GOP candidates back then and still now. [George Romney] refused to engage in personal attacks and kept his campaigns issue-based.

Mitt Romney and the people around him see campaigns as television marketing and voters as targets to be manipulated. Voters, they believe, make up their minds late and will be swayed with saturation television advertising. The campaign managers seek – daily it seems – for a magic bullet to force on the electorate that will move undecided and weak voters to Romney. [Mitt Romney] Policy papers, positions are rare and short on content and meaning.
(Emphasis Added)

Also this insight into Mitt living in the shadow of his father. Writes De Vries:

After the first debate it was wife Ann who said that Mitt had written “Dad” on paper he had at the lectern. Mrs. Romney, described as choking up during a post-debate interview with CNN, said it signified that Mitt respected what his father “taught me and what kind of person you are and I’m going to honor that.”

While that might make for some good post-debate spin, perhaps exploitation of his late father’s memory and dramatic television, the conduct of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign is a far cry from the kind of campaign and conduct, as a public servant, I saw during the seven years I worked in George Romney’s campaigns and served him as governor.

Mitt's New Idol: Corporate Money and Influence from the Koch Brothers and ALEC

Mitt: The Man from ALEC?
The Romney plan/program and agenda (what little of it there that is available) is that of the Koch Brothers and the powerful mega-wealthy corporatocracy now seeking supremacy and control of the nation via such groups as the New Traditionalist’s American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) which has taken over more than 20 individual state legislatures and railroaded the most extreme reversals and amendments to law in a lifetime. Here is Mitt Romney in 2009:

“Center reforms at the state level. Open the door to state plans designed to meet the various needs of their citizens. Before imposing a one-size-fits-all federal program, let the states serve as ‘the laboratories of democracy’.”

During the his second debate with President Obama, Romney used the terms in the second debate “States are the laboratories of democracy” again and throughout his positions and platforms (of the few that have been revealed) parallels to ALEC models and concepts have been exposed on Koch funded campaign denying climate change, his criticism of Obama regarding free reign for big oil and gas interests on drilling on public lands, his positions on privatizing public education (Romney used data from the ALEC Education Report Card to support his education pitches), his opposition to bargaining rights and public sector unions, and more recently his statements on closing down, or privatizing FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency). All these clearly show that even though he was probably not the first choice in the GOP primary field of candidates, he has now taken up the ALEC seal of approval.

 Read “Mitt Romney's meth labs of democracy” on DailyKos.  

The ‘Moral’ Mitt Monster and the ‘Noble Lie’
Mitt is a Mormon Bishop whom a Mormon scholar and historian has called unrepresentative of the Mormon religion. Dr. Gregory Prince, a Mormon Historian and powerful defender of his religion, was compelled to proclaim, “Mitt Romney is not the face of Mormonism”, in light of the 47% Statement from Mitt to high rolling donors in private at Boca Raton, Florida.

Mitt is a man whom many have labeled as “coreless” without a central set of established values, a man who possesses a serious “character flaw.” Mitt is a creature of the “Noble Lie.”

As Plato orated in his treatment of the “noble lie”:

“… the first and chief injunction that the god lays upon the rulers is that of nothing else are they to be such careful guardians, and so intently observant as of the intermixture of these metals in the souls of their offspring, and if sons are born to them with an infusion of brass or iron they shall by no means give way to pity in their treatment of them…”

This embodies the meaning-- such men as George Romney - a man of golden meddle-should mentor a son who, of the same class of good rulers and civic champions as his father, should be worthy of high office in his own right. To protect the elites and the aristocracy (the wealthy and the powerful) such leaders are given the right to participate in the use of the “Noble Lie”. From Wiki:

“In politics a noble lie is a myth or untruth, often, but not invariably, of a religious nature, knowingly told by an elite to maintain social harmony or to advance an agenda. The noble lie is a concept originated by Plato as described in the Republic.”

This use of the ‘Noble Lie’ is reinforced in the dubious practice of the Salt Lake Mormon hierarchy as shown in this quote: Marion G. Romney—a first cousin of George who was a former member of the First Presidency of the Church, its highest authority—famously related the instructions he’d received from the Mormon prophet Heber J. Grant:

"Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said: ‘Always keep your eye on the president of the church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.’ Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, 'But you don't need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.'"

Source: “Defending the Faith: Defending the Faith: Keeping our eye on the president of the church” by Daniel Peterson, Deseret News, July 7 2011.

The fact of the matter is that the Living Prophet-the present President of the Mormon Church-can and may change his mind and create new revelation directly from God (Revelation is closed in the Christian Church doctrinal stance). New “truth” and/or revelation remains open in the Church of the Latter Day Saints (LDS) or Mormons. Many changes to the Mormon scripture and key doctrinal writings have been changed, altered, or revised-up to nearly 4,000 times. The possibility of change is ever present in the 'Mormon cult'.

With this kind of wink and nod from the LDS Mormon’s living prophet, the president of the cult, has taken serious and substantial positions and stands on public policy via politics.

Again from Daniel Peterson, Desert News on July 7, 2011:

The church seldom speaks out on public policy issues, but sometimes it does. Two notable examples involve the proposed Equal Rights Amendment around 1980 and California's Proposition 8 in 2008.

Both cases provoked angry controversy, even within the church. And some politically conservative members — full disclosure: I'm a very serious conservative myself — quickly pointed out that members on the opposing side seemed to be out of step with church leaders.

More recently, the church has engaged the vexing problem of illegal immigration. On June 10, 2011, its Public Affairs Department even issued an official statement on the topic. This time, albeit very gently, it's the ox of some politically conservative Latter-day Saints that was gored.

Since then, I've been fascinated and disturbed to hear some of them — people who have generally welcomed and agreed with the church's rare statements on public policy, who have sometimes even prided themselves on being more faithful than their politically liberal brothers and sisters ("Can a good Mormon really be a Democrat?") — express outrage at the church for meddling in politics.

His Child is Going Backwards: George Romney Marching for Civil Rights in Michigan 1963

George Romney’s Challenge: His Faith & Racism
Then it is also very important to remember that the LSD/Mormon Church did not support the 1965 Civil Rights Act either. Writing in 1963, D. H. Oliver, a black attorney in Utah, stated:

“By reason of their numerical strength the Mormons elect most of the public officials, through the entire state, and here is where conflict begins. In most instances these elected public officials, conscious of the spirit concealed behind the walls of the Temple, adhere strictly to the doctrines of their church in the performance of their public duty and thereby refuse to employ or appoint any Negroes in any position of authority or trust.

… it is claimed that the failure of the 35th session of the Utah Legislature to pass any Civil Rights legislation was due to hidden and behind the scenes opposition from the Mormon Church... Any church has a right to believe what it will but it has no right to impose those beliefs on others against their will, and when those beliefs are detrimental to the welfare of others to the extent of infringing on their right to earn a decent living, such a church has no right to use the machinery of the state to enforce those beliefs.”

Source: A Negro On Mormonism, by David H. Oliver, 1963, pp. 30-31.

Read more on the LDS & Civil Rights in the 1960’s in “Curse of Cain? Racism in the Mormon Church”

During this time LDS missionaries were instructed to avoid contacting blacks and known black areas. Dr. Glen Davidson reported in The Christian Century:

“Mormon missionaries are directed not to proselytize Negroes and to keep out of ‘areas of transition.’ Not even Joseph Fielding Smith's [earlier] invitation to "darkies" is tolerated in the mission program. The membership ranks are being filled with those whose religious commitment is to the maintenance of a racist society and who find Mormon theology a sanctimonious front for their convictions” (The Christian Century, Sept. 29, 1965, p. 1183).

While the Mormon’s have accepted Blacks into the priesthood they have not changed their scripture or the historic nature of their racial bias and bigotry enforced by their own sacred writings and polity. Mitt grew up in this milieu and attitude and while his father fought it off at this same time even Gov. George Romney went against the high office of the church and was counseled in this personal letter warning the governor away from promotion and acceptance of the civil rights movement.

From “Mormons and the Civil Rights Act" by Ed Brayton on January 26, 2012:

The Boston Globe posts an incredible letter from one of the Mormon “prophets” to then-Michigan Gov. George Romney in 1964, taking him to task for his support of the Civil Rights Act. Here it is converted from PDF to text:

Governor George W. Romney
Governor’s Mansion Lansing, Michigan

Dear George:

It was a real pleasure to greet and have a moment to visit with you and Lenore here this past week. It is wonderful to see how enthusiastically you are received by the good people of Utah.

After listening to your talk on Civil Rights, I am very much concerned. Several others have expressed the same concern to me. It does not altogether harmonize with my own understandings regarding this subject; therefore, I thought to drop you a note — not in my official Church position, but as a personal friend. Only President McKay can speak for the Church.

I felt, George, your views were most liberal on this vital problem in the light of the revelations, but nevertheless, I cannot deny you the right of your position if it represents your true belief and feelings.

I would like to suggest you read two items on this subject, both by the Prophet Joseph Smith. Turn to page 269 of Teachings Of The Prophet Joseph Smith by Joseph Fielding Smith, and read beginning the middle of the page under the caption, “The Status of the Negro,” giving particular attention to the closing sentence on page 270. Also, read from History of the Church, Period 1, Volume 2, beginning on page 436, under the heading, “The Prophet’s Views on Abolition,” which article continues to the bottom of page 440. After reading this last-mentioned statement by the Prophet, then come back to the last paragraph on page 438, and give it some real thought. When I reflect upon the Prophet’s statements and remember what happened to three of our nation’s presidents who were very active in the Negro cause, I am sobered by their demise. They went contrary to the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith — unwittingly, no doubt, but nevertheless, the prophecy of Joseph Smith, “. . . those who are determined to pursue a course, which shows an opposition, and a feverish restlessness against the decrees of the Lord, will learn, when perhaps it is too late for their own good, that God can do His own work, without the aid of those who are not dictated by His counsel,” has and will continue to be fulfilled.

In this respect, let me give you a personal experience. A friend of mine in Arizona — not a Church member — a great champion of the colored race -— came to me after my call into the Twelve, and acknowledged President McKay to be a Prophet of God. He wanted me to ask President McKay to inquire of the Lord to see if the Lord would not lift the curse from the colored race and give them the privileges of the Priesthood. I explained to him that the Lord had placed the curse upon the Negro, which denied him the Priesthood; therefore, it was the Lord’s responsibility — not man’s — to change His decision. This friend of mine met a very tragic end by drowning. He was a most enthusiastic advocate of the colored cause and went about promoting for them all the privileges, social opportunities, and participation enjoyed by the Whites.

I am sure you know that the Prophet Joseph Smith, in connection with the Negro problem of this country, proposed to Congress that they sell public lands and buy up the Negro slaves and transport them back to Africa from whence they came. I am sure the Prophet, with his vision and understanding, foresaw the problems we are faced with today with this race, which caused him to promote this program.

The statements of the Prophet Joseph Smith have been a helpful influence on me because they accord with my own understandings regarding the Negro. I cannot, in my own feelings, accept the idea of public accommodations; the taking from the Whites their wishes to satisfy the Negros. I do not have any objection to recognizing the Negro in his place and giving him every opportunity for education, for employment, for whatever contribution he can make to the society of men and the protection and blessings of Government. Yet, all these things, in my judgment, should accord with the expressions of the Prophet Joseph Smith. It is not right to force any class or race of people upon those of a different social order or race classification. People are happier when placed in the environment and association of like interests, racial instincts, habits, and natural groupings.

I am enclosing a little booklet entitled Mormonism and the Negro, which you may already have. If not, it is an enlightening exposition and quite well reflects the Church position in regard to these people.

I am not against a Civil Rights Bill if it conforms to the views of the Prophet Joseph Smith according to the references above given. I fully agree the Negro is entitled to considerations, also stated above, but not full social benefits nor inter-marriage privileges with the Whites, nor should the Whites be forced to accept them into restricted White areas. In my judgment, the present proposed Bill of Rights is vicious legislation. There needs to be some modification. The position of the Church cannot change until the Lord changes it Himself. Certainly I am not for exploiting racial or religious prejudices, but it is the present play up to the Negro voters which is unnecessarily creating problems that by a more firm, sensible approach can be avoided. There will be a few die-hard leaders, but then that has always been true with any debatable issue. Principle — religious or otherwise —— cannot be abrogated for political expediency.

Now, don’t think I am against the Negro people, because I have several in my employ. We must understand and recognize their status and then, accordingly, provide for them. I just don’t think we can get around the Lord’s position in relation to the Negro without punishment for our acts; going contrary to that which He has revealed. The Lord will not permit His purposes to be frustrated by man.

Please understand I have a great respect and admiration for you, but because of my feelings I thought I should express myself as I have so you will know my personal position.

This letter is for your personal use only (also Lenore), and is not to be used in any other way. It does not require an answer.

With best wishes and success to you and Lenore always,
I am Faithfully your friend and brother,

Delbert L. Stapley
(Emphasis Added)

George Romney overrode this kind of advice, pushed ahead, and advocated and worked for civil rights. Son Mitt has a very racist national vice chair, John Sununu who is overtly racist and the Republican party is deeply racist as per the statement of Lawrence Wilkinson, former aide to Colon Powell, who just comes out an says it like it is that “the GOP is fully of racists” in response to right wing attacks on Powell’s endorsement of President Obama.

This theme was taken up earlier by many, including the Washington Post’s Barbara A. Reynolds in “GOP: red, white and racist?” back in January 2012:

“So that leaves Mitt Romney, who should also be judged by what he has not said. Romney served as a leader in the Mormon Church whose doctrine until 1978 stated that people with black skin were cursed by God, could not enter heaven, nor serve in the Mormon priesthood. It seems a fair-minded person would have condemned this policy but Romney apparently did not.”

What has Mitt done to intervene and alter the Old Southern Strategy established by Dick Nixon which along with religion is the main glue in the reliable southern block of “Christian© Biblical Values Voters”.

Actually Mitt has placed a frank discussion of his cult’s beliefs and practices off limits, he will not discuss his faith.

 See Frank Rich in “Mitt Romney is afraid to talk about his Mormon faith” (VIDEO)

From Walter Shapiro on June 8, 2012:

“This time around (national presidential election 2012), though, the flashpoint is likely to be Mitt Romney’s religion. Romney’s Mormonism is entwined with his biography: Not only was he a missionary in France, but he also served as a bishop and stake president, overseeing a dozen congregations in the Boston area. As Boston Globe reporters Michael Kranish and Scott Helman conclude in their biography, The Real Romney:

"The portrait of Romney that emerges from those he led and served with in the church is of a leader who was pulled between Mormonism’s conservative core views…and the demands…for a more elastic, more open-minded application of church doctrine.’ “

All this would be ho-hum material if Romney were a Methodist or an Episcopalian. But Romney’s church, with its polygamous past and its easily mocked missionary zeal (The Book of Mormon), is outside the American religious mainstream. And that means that we are just one incendiary Super PAC donor or one intemperate cable TV comment by a Democrat away from a major campaign flap over Mitt’s Mormonism. So with that in mind, what should the journalistic rules be regarding Romney’s religion?”

(Break)

“…left unanswered is the deeper question of the role of Romney’s religious faith in understanding his political persona.”

Source: “Romney’s Religion, What should journalists do with the Mormon thing?” by Walter Shapiro on June 8, 2012.  

Back to the 'Noble Lie'
We have this from ancient wisdom:

"Our form of government does not enter into rivalry with the institutions of others. We do not copy our neighbors, but are an example to them. It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few. But while the laws secure equal justice to all alike in their private disputes, the claim of excellence is also recognized; and when a citizen is in any way distinguished he is preferred to the public service, not as a matter of privilege, but as the reward of merit. "Neither is poverty a bar, for a man may benefit his country whatever be the obscurity of his conditions. There is no exclusiveness in our public life, and in our private intercourses we are not suspicious of one another, nor angry with our neighbor if he does what he likes; we do not give him sour looks which, though harmless, are not pleasant". -- Pericles (Athenian statesman, 5th century B.C.)

How does this relate to Mitt Romney here just days before the election?
There are a ton of items of dissimulation involved in the Romney campaign and so many of Mitt’s verbose and angry, intense spiels of disordered facts and false assertions, so much so that even the president found it hard, if not impossible, to reply to Mitt’s motor-mouthing through dozens of his stump stands on issues. And then in the 3rd and final debate President Obama found the “coreless” Mitt parroting Obama’s own views and stances on a wide variety of issues seeking to appear as moderate as his father, Gov. George. Astounding? Confounding? Deceptive and untrue. It’s all boilerplate Romney use of the ‘Noble Lie’ principle, do whatever you need, but by all means win the election for your backers and backroom boys.

See Mitt Run. See Ann Defend. See Mitt and Ann run the gamut of ‘Four Pinocchios’ fact checked lies and distortions.

It’s all for the greater good and maximum gain of the extremist Republican establishment and K-Street powerbrokers, the resurrected Ralph Reed’s, and the war-loving Neo-Cons awaiting in the wings, just off stage, barely out of sight.

This from an overview of the “Noble Lie” from Plato’s Republic:

Plato presented the Noble Lie in a fictional tale, wherein Socrates provides the origin of the three social classes who compose the republic proposed by Plato; Socrates speaks of a socially stratified society, wherein the populace are told "a sort of Phoenician tale":

“… the earth, as being their mother, delivered them, and now, as if their land were their mother and their nurse, they ought to take thought for her and defend her against any attack, and regard the other citizens as their brothers and children of the self-same earth. . . While all of you, in the city, are brothers, we will say in our tale, yet god, in fashioning those of you who are fitted to hold rule, mingled gold in their generation, for which reason they are the most precious — but in the helpers, silver, and iron and brass in the farmers and other craftsmen. And, as you are all akin, though for the most part you will breed after your kinds, it may sometimes happen that a golden father would beget a silver son, and that a golden offspring would come from a silver sire, and that the rest would, in like manner, be born of one another. So that the first and chief injunction that the god lays upon the rulers is that of nothing else are they to be such careful guardians, and so intently observant as of the intermixture of these metals in the souls of their offspring, and if sons are born to them with an infusion of brass or iron they shall by no means give way to pity in their treatment of them, but shall assign to each the status due to his nature and thrust them out among the artisans or the farmers. And again, if from these there is born a son with unexpected gold or silver in his composition they shall honor such and bid them go up higher, some to the office of guardian, some to the assistanceship, alleging that there is an oracle that the city shall then be overthrown when the man of iron or brass is its guardian.”

The fictional Socrates, created by Plato, proposes and claims that if the people believed "this myth . . . that would have a good effect, making them more inclined to care for the state and one another. This is his noble lie: "a contrivance for one of those falsehoods that come into being in case of need, of which we were just now talking, some noble one…”

On the Reader:
"GEORGE AND MITT: Like Father, Like Son? Not quite" (pdf Version) - essay comparing Mitt Romney and George Romney by Michigander Walt De Vries (Text Version)

Related Slates:

Middling Mitt Romney Not of His Fathers'Sterling Civic Michigan Mettle (Gaskell & George Romney) (June 2012) - For Mitt Romney, Billy Graham ‘Sells Out’ His Faith &Jesus for Political Advantage (October 2012) - The Crushing Blow to Mitt’s Quix-Toxic Quest: ‘Good Samaritan’or ‘Corporate Bandit’ (October 2012) or all posts on Mitt Romney or George Romney.