Others, like Mitt Romney, go further. Elections bring out fiction, acrimony and hagiography. The latter is the drivel money buys to hide the truth even if the truth may be the only signs of humanity left in what has otherwise become an empty shell.
Though an early supporter of the Vietnam War, Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, including a 31-month stretch as a “minister of religion” in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused.
In 1994 he told The Boston Herald, “I was not planning on signing up for the military.”
“It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam, but nor did I take any actions to remove myself from the pool of young men who were eligible for the draft,” Romney told the newspaper.
But that’s exactly what Romney did, according Selective Service records. He received his first deferment for “activity in study” in October 1965 while at Stanford.
After his first year at Stanford, Romney qualified for 4-D deferment status as “a minister of religion or divinity student.” It was a status he would hold from July 1966 until February 1969, a period he largely spent in France working as a Mormon missionary.
He was granted the deferment even as some young Mormon men elsewhere were denied that same status, which became increasingly controversial in the late 1960s. The Mormon church, a strong supporter of American involvement in Vietnam, ultimately limited the number of church missionaries allowed to defer their military service using the religious exemption.
Everything known about Mitt Romney is hagiography, basically bull. This will be something different, unvarnished, and true.
Draft evasion isn’t a clever ruse to avoid serving your nation during wartime; it’s a criminal act punishable by ten years in prison and a large fine. It labels violators felons for life, prohibits voting, running for public office and can even, heaven forbid, prohibit serving as President of the United States.
The difference between the two involves analysis of the legality of efforts to be “unavailable” for service.
There are several “official histories” of Mitt Romney, but his favorite is written by John Kasich of the Boston Globe, his official approved biographer. Kasich wrote a bestselling book on Romney, oft describing him as a “liberal Ronald Reagan.”
However, in 2007, it was Kasich, in his role of “investigative reporter” to use his hundreds of hours of research and full access to all Romney documents to look into accusations of draft evasion leveled against Romney.
Kasich had something to hide, a Mitt Romney with a past, one of failure, one of weakness, humanity he hid from and then, later, abandoned like a snake crawls out of its old skin. The new Mitt, isn’t the real Mitt.
We trace Mitt Romney from Cranbrook Academy in stylish Franklin, Michigan, son of an auto magnate, son of Michigan’s governor, sensitive, too willing to do what was needed to be accepted and subject to expectations, scion of a “superstar” father who nearly gained the presidency himself but for a fatal flaw we will learn of later.
From Cranbrook, Mitt went to Stanford. Much is made of this, a foolish photo, an empty smile. What isn’t told is why he left, damaged, his diagnosis and what we will call rumors of a disaster that might well have cost Mitt both his future and perhaps his life.
Thus, in 1966, Governor George Romney received his son, facing certain military service or, worse still, perhaps being found unfit for that service.
The decision to send Mitt to France, a nation that didn’t recognize the Mormon religion, taking advantage of his father’s position and ability to “engineer” a “single service” exemption based on a fathers love for a damaged child, hagiography stepped in and the lies began.
It would be years before Mitt would reappear, sent off to Brigham Young University, at the time reviled for racism and mediocrity, and a history would be written, the public one that of riches and success, a private one of pain, of moral failure and weakness.
Kasich explains Romney’s history using the following details and resources:
“As the Vietnam War raged in the 1960s, Mitt Romney received a deferment from the draft as a Mormon “minister of religion” for the duration of his missionary work in France, which lasted two and a half years.
The deferments for Mormon missionaries became increasingly controversial in the late 1960s, especially in Utah, leading the Mormon Church and the government to limit the number of church missionaries who could put off their military service. That agreement called for each church ward, or church district, to designate one male every six months to be exempted from potential duty for the duration of his missionary work.
Romney’s home state was Michigan, making his 4-D exemption as a missionary all but automatic because of the relatively small number of Mormon missionaries from that state. It might have been more difficult in Utah, where the huge Mormon population meant that there were sometimes more missionaries than available exemptions. Most missions lasted two and a half years, as Romney’s did.
Barry Mayo, who was counselor to the bishop of the ward in Pontiac, Michigan, where Romney attended church, recalled in an interview that wards were allowed to exempt one missionary every six months from the draft. He said that he could not recall any time in which more than one potential draftee sought an exemption in the ward in a six-month period, so Romney’s deferment was never in doubt.
There are problems with Kasich’s article, more than a few. You see, technically a “missionary” is a volunteer, not a formally ordained minister. With every Mormon male claiming status as an ordained minister, whether missionary or not, the issues would have involved several that touched on constitutional ground, IRS codes and Selective Service definitions.
There were issues during the Vietnam War of local SSS boards in Utah, made up entirely of LDS (Latter Day Saints or “Mormons”) giving blanket draft exemptions to all males belonging to the church under the edict that any “male Mormon” is considered part of a general “ministry.”
This issue was challenged in court under Imus v. United States:
The findings of Imus v. United States were that though the Mormon Church was abusing draft law by offering blanket exemptions to all its members through church controlled draft boards, challenging the draft in general, which is what Imus did, having destroyed his draft card, did not give him basis for finding draft law illegal.
Thus, though the Church was systematically violating law, as no case was ever brought against them for that, they could continue to do so in the State of Utah.
Michigan is another story.
Here, Kasich has one source, one with no authority, no standing and no memory, “Barry Mayo.”
These are the actual facts:
- There is no record of there ever having been an agreement between the SSS and draft boards in Michigan involving Mormons.
- There was never any differentiation between Mormon missionaries or simple church members, who all had, in Utah at least, tried to claim draft exemption under D4 status before 1971 and D2 status after.
- Status as an ordained minister is more simply applied through IRS statute. If you pay no property taxes on your home, you are a minister. If you do, you are not. Mormons pay property taxes and are, thusly, according to the government, no more “ministers” than lay members of any other church.
- It is also a critical issue that, until many many years later, Mormons were “whites only” and the ministry “men only,” thus, the church, at least on the basis of race could be a non-profit but not qualify as a religion nor could BYU, a school that banned African Americans and later offered them special restrictions and “sub-human” status.
A Mormon church publication deals with this issue with great clarity:
A group of black taxpayers and their minor children attending public schools in Mississippi brought a class action on May 21, 1969 against the United States, seeking to enjoin the Secretary of the Treasury and the IRS from according tax exempt status to private schools in Mississippi which excluded African-American students on the basis of race or color.
In July 1970, while the lawsuit was pending, the IRS issued two Releases, announcing that “it can no longer legally justify allowing tax-exempt status to private schools which practice racial discrimination nor can it treat gifts to such schools as charitable deductions for income tax purposes.”
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the black plaintiffs, concluding that the IRS actions of denying tax -exemption to discriminatory schools was constitutional.
Such schools, however, were not entitled to public support, as which tax-exemption qualified. It reasoned that the Federal Government could not under the Constitution give direct financial aid to schools practicing racial discrimination, but that tax exemptions and deductions certainly constitute a Federal Government benefit and support. “While that support is indirect, and is in the nature of a matching grant rather than an unconditional grant, it would be difficult indeed to establish that such support can be provided consistently with the Constitution” .
Beginning in May 1975, the University permitted unmarried African-Americans to enroll, but a disciplinary rule prohibits interracial dating and marriage. That rule read:
There is to be no interracial dating
1. Students who are partners in an interracial marriage will be expelled.
2. Students who are members of or affiliated with any group or organization which holds as one of its goals or advocates interracial marriage will be expelled.
3. Students who date outside their own race will be expelled.
4. Students who espouse, promote, or encourage others to violate the University’s dating rules and regulations will be expelled.
What they fail to list here when “support” for a “racist” institution is considered unconstitutional, those supports include, not just tax exempt status and any federal subsidies but draft exempt status as well.
Thus, colleges such as Bob Jones University and BYU were constitutionally denied “S2” student deferments for their students.
Thus, Mitt Romney never had a student deferment until 1966, when he left Stanford and none was ever reinstated.
As to after 1970 and Romney’s draft number, his rejoining the SSS system after having been “missing” for nearly 5 years would have had no legal standing.
As Kasich, Romney’s “biographer,” has stated that there were few Mormons in Michigan and special regional groups were given a consideration that applied only to the Mormon church and no other group, and as Kasich has all Romney records, is it not strange that he offers no references for these facts he contends are true?
A search of the CFR, the Federal Registry and the records of the Selective Service Commission yield no records of any such decisions of special dispensation for Mormons.
Moreover, there are several gross misrepresentations here. No such documentation exists for Mitt Romney. In fact,Mormon’s serving in France, were, not only not recognized as an official religion in that country, but use the ruse of offing free language lessons, not religious instruction:
There are no Mormon facilities in France now nor have there ever been. It wasn’t until 2009 that Mormonism applied to be registered as an established religion in France.
In 2006, the Mormon church came under investigation for its policies toward women and children which are inconsistent with French law. A report was issued. (French Language)
The ADFI (Union in Defense of Families and Individuals) declared Mormonism a cultand a danger to French society, indicating it used trickery and deceit to proselytize, offing free English lessons and genealogy research in order to attempt to recruit members.
Additionally, Michigan had two “Mormon Stakes,” the official regional districts of the Church. These are the organizations claimed by Kasich to have offered the special draft designation of D4 to Romney.
One problem, of course, is that if all Mormons are officially considered ministers, as the church claims, then why would a missionary student apply for status of an ordained minister, a status equally available to all Mormon males?
No differentiation is mentioned as this contingency was overlooked while the “spin” was being applied.
As to the Mormon population, there were 30,000 Mormons in Michigan, hardly a small number, one that would have yielded thousands subject to draft by SSS, not one or two.
You see, of the two “Stakes” the Mormon church established in Michigan, one in 1940, the second in 1952, Mitt Romney belonged to the second.
This “Stake” included thousands of male members of draft age.
The founder and head of this stake was George W. Romney, former president of American Motors Corporation and father of Mitt Romney.
Thus, were there such an agreement with the SSS, which there is no documentary record of and were there only one or two Mormons available to the draft, something reality is utterly at odds with, we have one other glaring problem.
Mitt Romney is supposed to have received his nomination from his own father for a questionable and undocumented and clearly unconstitutional deferment.
This deferment was to have been issued in 1966.
In 1963, Mitt Romney’s father was elected governor of Michigan and served in that office until 1969 when he joined the Nixon Administration as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
Thus, it is as governor of the State that a special unconstitutional deferment, not recognized by any documentation, was awarded to Mitt Romney.
In 1968, George W. Romney was the Republican front runner for president, easily outpolling Richard Nixon.
George Romney was born in Mexico to Mormon parents who fled there to avoid prosecution for polygamy. They remained in Mexico, renounced their American citizenship and never had it reinstated.
Two odd technicalities apply to Romney’s attempt at the presidency:
- He was the son of Mexican parents, born in Mexico, parents that never legally established American citizenship during their lifetime.
- George W. Romney served as governor of Michigan though born in Mexico and never legally achieving American citizenship during his lifetime. He was, when governor and when running for president, legally a “naturally born citizen of Mexico” and residing in the United States illegally, subject to deportation at any time.
A description of the family’s status as “illegal aliens” is made in this article by Huffington Post:
His family moved to that country fleeing American laws against polygamy, then considered a crucial pillar of his church.
The Romneys are Mexican since Miles Park Romney crossed the border in 1884, rejecting the Edmund Act that in 1882 declared polygamy a felony.
In 1890, the Mormon Church (LDS) disavowed plural marriage.
According to an AP story, Miles married his fifth wife seven years later. His own father had 12 wives.
In 1912, Mitt grandfather’s Gaskell Romney returned to the U.S. fleeing the Mexican Revolution. (No mention of immigration papers here).
In 1884, the Romney family were citizens of the Kingdom of Desert and never recognized American authority.
When the Utah became a state in 1896, the Romney family had lived outside its borders for 12 years. They were established Mexican citizens, and had they been American citizens, something they never claimed and publicly renounced in order to avoid prosecution for violations of the Edmund act, their citizenship would have been forfeit after 5 years.
Instead, the Romney family reentered the US illegally after 26 years, Mexican citizens who, at best had lost “implied” American citizenship, long sacrificed as fleeing felons residing overseas for more than 5 years, no different than any other fugitive who loses his citizenship while residing overseas to avoid prosecution for crimes.
Wikipedia gives an interesting picture of that time:
Questions were occasionally asked about Romney’s eligibility to run for Presidentowing to his birth in Mexico, given the ambiguity in the United States Constitutionover the phrase “natural-born citizen“. (Romney departed the race before the matter could be more definitively resolved, although the preponderance of opinion then and since has been that he was eligible. )
The record the press has left is fiction, spin, utter fabrication, lack of documentation, no qualified sources, nothing covering the draft status of Mitt Romney, no honest discussion of the barbaric and un-American policies of the Mormon church on race or the actual standing of Brigham Young University, then no different than the American Nazi Party or KKK in its policies.
Coverage for Mitt’s draft evasion, his failure to apply for the Carter era clemency and do his two years of required public service is simple. He came from a wealthy family, rules were made that applied to Mitt Romney and Mitt Romney only, he was kept to different, far lower standards than other Americans and grew up in an environment where living outside the law had been a family tradition for well over a century.
His father was a better man that he was. His father was politically independent, racially fair and ethical, painfully honest regarding America’s foreign policy and deeply respected.
His father’s major personal failing was his son.
He entered into conflicts of interest to save his son from a war he thought unnecessary, sending his son out of the country and protecting him from prosecution through use of power and, quite possibly, giving up the presidency to protect his son from prison.
Yes, Nixon would have blackmailed George W. Romney over this and anything else. This was the nature of Nixon.
The question at hand is the character of Mitt Romney. Military service isn’t the answer to all things. John McCain, for those familiar with his record as a POW and his presidential pardon, are more than aware. Those who aren’t are unlikely to, at this late date; bother to learn what they failed to when it mattered most.
Ann Romney, wife of Mitt, seems to understand the problem best when she expresses how the campaign has threatened Mitt Romney’s mental health. Mitt Romney is clearly talented but morally bereft of values, willing to say anything that he believes will help him get his way and, for those who watch carefully, slowly becoming mentally unhinged.
The real issues of the election are those of a war in the Middle East and a return to fiscal policies that gut small business and the Middle Class, abandon and destroy the working classes and turn total rule over to the rich.
By “rich,” we also mean “foreign.”
One critical point we can make is that issues of military service and Romney’s avoidance of it during wartime don’t just make him less than American. They strongly suggest that he was openly a criminal and that he may well still be, as seen in his pattern of foreign bank accounts and the friends he depends on for financing.
I keep thinking about France, the 30 months Romney was there, we are told anyway. I have seen three photographs, taken within seconds of each other, a borrowed bicycle with specialized “toe clip” racing pedals, no books or materials, as though one’s entire “missionhood” were a minute long, spent entirely in a parking lot.
Maybe he lived a life of privation and suffering. During the same period, I had, for only a very short time, an inexpensive Kodak camera. I did one roll of 24 photos, leaving a base, on patrol and ambush, in Vietnam.
The camera was stolen soon afterwards, the $8 it cost was, at the time, considered an extravagance as was fresh food, clean water, clothing and rudimentary medical care (and decent weapons).
The $15 dollars a month pay I drew didn’t allow for much, but then, what was my time worth anyway?
Maybe I am still a member of America’s millions, the “useless eaters,” the 47%, perhaps I will never know where that line in drawn. Maybe the line is an idea, and has no dollar figure attached. To Kasich, it was vital to explain Mitt’s humanity, explain that the dog tied to the roof of the car was in a cage and not simply “hog tied” like they do at Gitmo. Maybe the dog might have been happier had the family put a child in the cage with it.
Would Romney had stopped if he had looked in his mirror and seen them bouncing down the road as so often happens with anything other Americans attach to the roofs of their cars or would he have driven on? His positions on veterans and women’s health, Social Security and his plans for a new war in the Middle East are a clue, “bye bye puppy, bye bye little Jimmie, daddy will check on you on the way back.”
Official Mormon Policy on African Americans:
Summary of the Curse of Cain Doctrine and Priesthood-Ban Policy
For 130 years (1848-1978), Mormon Church leaders taught the following:
Source: Veterans Today