Willard Mitt Romney has an interesting bloodline.

Willard Romney is not just a politician who happens to be Mormon. He happens to be a descendant of a Mormon Apostle, Parley P. Pratt.

As most of us know, Mitt, is the son of George Romney, the 43rd Governor of Michigan. George also ran against Nixon for the Republican nomination in 1968. Nixon later appointed George as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

George's mother, Anna Pratt, is the daughter of Helaman Pratt, who was an early leader of the LDS church in Mexico. Helaman is the son of Parley P. Pratt.

Parley was an original member of the "Quorum of the 12 Apostles".

Members are considered to be apostles, with a special calling to be evangelical ambassadors to the world.

I don't know why or how, but Parley was murdered in 1857.

Parley is the son of Charity Dickinson, a descendant of Anne Hutchinson (1591-1643), a "most prominent woman in colonial America".

Anne Hutchinson is the daughter of Francis Marbury who was an English deacon in 1578.

And there you have it, Folks. Mitt comes from a long line of influential and powerful people. Is this a coincidence? How do the Mormon elites view Mitt Romney? Is this the reason why Mitt has excelled at everything he has touched? I'd like your opinion.

I'd also like to hear from any Mormons on here. How does this sit with you?

Personally, I would like to see a more detailed genealogical tree for his family, before I come to any conclusions.

Not surprising at all.

Most presidents are related to someone famous.

www.familyforest.com...

Bush was related to eleanor of aquitaine

reply to post by grey580


Yes, I knew that also. I'm not the type to think that our world is being guided by external forces, but after researching Romney, I can't help but think that these people are doing SOMETHING to keep their descendants in power.

Just another cronie from the family of 400.

Nothing surprising there. Most if not all major figures are part of the original 400 families. The real rich man's club.

We aren't invited.

~Tenth

reply to post by UnaChispa

I'd also like to hear from any Mormons on here. How does this sit with you?

I'm an ex-Mormon.

I've never really looked into his genealogy but at the same time it's not surprising. A lot of folks here in Utah are related to historical Mormon leaders one way or another.

I started to question what I was told to believe in around the age of 8. Everything they taught me to be FACT just seemed so weird and contradictory to a lot of History.

The Mormon Church is good at business .... and that's about it. They have so many holes and hypocrisies that it astonishes me how people truly believe in it..... oh well ...to each their own.


What I find interesting is that Pratt was murdered in 1857. I might have to investigate that a little more and find out why.

from wikipedia ...this is priceless lol

Pratt practiced plural marriage and had twelve wives. One of Pratt's great-great-grandsons is Mitt Romney, former Massachusetts governor and candidate for the 2008 and 2012 Republican presidential nominations.[28] One of his great-great-great-grandsons is Jon Huntsman, former Utah governor and Ambassador to China, and a candidate for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.[29] Pratt's grandson, William King Driggs, was the father of the King Sisters.

Huntsman and Romney are related!

reply to post by tothetenthpower


What are you saying exactly? My ancestry can be traced back to a King of Germany; whose name is lost to me at the moment. That is from my maternal grandmother’s side. On my maternal grandfather’s side his first relative to relocate from Hungary to America has had all information about him cleansed from public record for a reason none of us have been fortunate enough to know. Because my lineage can be traced back to at least one wealthy European dynasty, does that make me somehow an insider in this international cabal? I think not.

Simply because someone is born as a descendant of wealthy European royal/aristocratic families guarantees you nothing today. Few actually succeed and become recognized, the majority of us are average citizens now with no ‘connections’ and ask for no privileges, as we would not receive them anyway. Please do not use the class warfare card even against aristocratic/royal families, it is simply uncalled for. Point out the faults of individuals, not classes of men.

Most anyone who has access to genealogical material can cherry pick a famous ancestor or two and claim special status. I'm descended from the Montagues and Woodsons. They were some of the first colonists at Jamestown, the first English colony in Virginia. The first English Montague came over with William the Conqueror and the family still has large land holdings in England today. I can prove Mary Montague was my great grandmother and a Montague genealogy published in 1885 takes it all the way back. Also, Jesse James (Jesse Woodson James) was my fifth cousin and Prince Charles is my 21st cousin.

It doesn't take much to be related to everyone. Just count four generations per century, which is conservative. Go back 1,000 years, which would be 40 generations. Two to the 40th power is more than a trillion. Only about 100 billion humans have ever lived. The point is that you can go back in RECORDED history far enough to show a relationship with everyone. Presidents and other famous people generate more interest in their genealogy than people like you and me. It doesn't take much to cherry pick the famous ancestors. If you had the wherewithall, you could do it for yourself as well.

So pointing out that Romney is related to some deacon in the 1500s isn't really saying much. A deacon? C'mon! That's not even royal blood. We all have those people in our background and I absolutely guarantee that you and I are cousins and that you have equally famous people in your own ancestry.

reply to post by dplum517


Thank you very much for your input. I guess it might not be that significant as I thought. I must have overlooked that Jon Huntsman connection. I guess that is what happens when your ancestors have a whole bunch of kids.

reply to post by Misoir


That's not what I meant Misoir. I mean the 400 families who have ruled the world since Roman times.

The rotchild's and the religious etc..

Some people say bildeberger's are also in that section, but I tend to doubt all of them are part of that elite group of people.

Being from a rich family or aristocrat family doesn't get your anything your right, unless you are part of one of those familes.

Liked the Windsors which are German...not English..at least not anymore.

~Tenth

Originally posted by schuyler
Most anyone who has access to genealogical material can cherry pick a famous ancestor or two and claim special status. I'm descended from the Montagues and Woodsons. They were some of the first colonists at Jamestown, the first English colony in Virginia. The first English Montague came over with William the Conqueror and the family still has large land holdings in England today. I can prove Mary Montague was my great grandmother and a Montague genealogy published in 1885 takes it all the way back. Also, Jesse James (Jesse Woodson James) was my fifth cousin and Prince Charles is my 21st cousin.

It doesn't take much to be related to everyone. Just count four generations per century, which is conservative. Go back 1,000 years, which would be 40 generations. Two to the 40th power is more than a trillion. Only about 100 billion humans have ever lived. The point is that you can go back in RECORDED history far enough to show a relationship with everyone. Presidents and other famous people generate more interest in their genealogy than people like you and me. It doesn't take much to cherry pick the famous ancestors. If you had the wherewithall, you could do it for yourself as well.

So pointing out that Romney is related to some deacon in the 1500s isn't really saying much. A deacon? C'mon! That's not even royal blood. We all have those people in our background and I absolutely guarantee that you and I are cousins and that you have equally famous people in your own ancestry.

I wasn't trying to put emphasis on the deacon, but I was TRYING to make it known that he was a descendant of a Mormon Apostle.

I guess I'm the only one that thought that was strange.

Also ....just to note.

This isn't preached gospel but rather Mormon lore.

Many Mormons believe that when the "End Times" occur ..... there will be a Mormon sitting as POTUS.

So, in a historical sense ..... you could say it's likely that in the top echelons of the church .... they are desperately trying to make a Mormon become president.

ex-mormon here who grew up in the church till about 20.

I didnt really leave just fell away I suppose didnt want to serve a mission on personaly reasons and certain dogmatic members kept pushing me or changed their attitude to me when they found out which irked me immensely since im some one who believes that a persons choices are theirs to make alone and should have them respected. I have nothing against the church or any religion. I just do my own thing now.

Personally Romney scares the crud out of me, it wouldnt matter if he was hindu, catholic, taoist or any other religion, after all he's a very rich, conservative, flip flopping wealthy businessman whos proven to love money more than anything else, and I dont like people like that at all and dont trust em regardless of who or what they are. He could be endorsed by God himself in the flesh and id (if I was American) still would not vote for him.

As to his genealogy, the church in America tends to be alot more insular than the church (particularly in Utah) than in the rest of the world, heck sometimes in the past when we'd have American missionaries around for dinner or visitors or cousins who are members visiting, hearing how they do things and how they act was interesting compared to our own members small differences but noticeable differences, so to have a link like this to a head of the early church isnt surprising at all for a promonent American member. Not that it should really matter anyway... although some people think it should, I judge a person on their individual actions not their families past.

What gets me angry though is, and ive seen it in my own family who are all still members is that the fact he's Mormon and that that is more important than what he's done and what he stands for which to me is a very very bad mindset. Standing behind a person simply because religiously he's the same as you rather than who they are as an individual is wrong, narrow minded and shows a lack of intelligence.

Interestingly my mother who basically from the moment she heard a mormon was running for the republican nomination has been excited and saying it doesnt matter what he is like since (if elected), he must be part of gods plan (although she one of those people who thinks the world is gonna end sometime around Christmas), has finally this morning mentioned that shes gone off of Romney quite alot thanks to something she read in the morning paper, not sure what it was.

So finally she's seen a little light. Unfortunately, you'll have many Americans (my conservative voting cousins being one lot) who will vote for him simply because he's a member first and a conservative second.

Nothing wrong with a persons religion, and theirs nothing wrong with the mormon church for the most part (ie regular everyday members, not sure of the top level leadership), their perfectly good upright people and all religions have bad apples after all, given their all populated with humans.

But that being said, Romney isnt the kinda guy that would make a good president at all, and there would definitely be unscrupulous church members both high and low who would take advantage of him being president if by some fluke he manages to become it.

So no, doesnt matter who is ancestors where, or what religion he hails from... Romney as a person isnt presidential material, none of them are, neither republican nor democrat in my mind. I see 4 more years of Obama anyway for America, anyone else who doesnt needs their glasses cleaned or their head pulled out of the clouds.

Originally posted by dplum517
Also ....just to note.

This isn't preached gospel but rather Mormon lore.

Many Mormons believe that when the "End Times" occur ..... there will be a Mormon sitting as POTUS.

So, in a historical sense ..... you could say it's likely that in the top echelons of the church .... they are desperately trying to make a Mormon become president.

This is true, the thing is... what did the members think about this when Romneys father ran for Republican nomination in 1968? Did they think "oh here we go, possible end times!". I mean it didnt happen obviously, but given the hype this particular year has I can see a number of members getting excited (my mother being one). Sad really

Could happen, but personally I wouldnt want it.

reply to post by BigfootNZ

Romneys father ran for Republican nomination in 1968

I learn something new everyday. ^

To be honest .... I think some Mormons have lived their entire lives thinking they will live to see the end times or the second coming.

....and yes, it's sad to have a belief like that IMO..... whether it happens or not

My mom is also one of those people who picks him simply cause he's mormon. He could be accused a murder and she would still vote for him.

reply to post by UnaChispa


Interesting post, I was unaware that I am a distant cousin of Mitt's. I am a direct descendant of Anne Marbury Hutchinson.

The most awkward part of his history is his and his dads close/direct relations to the Rockefellers.

reply to post by MsAphrodite


Wow, that is pretty cool.

Whateva!!!@!! We don't choose our parent and grandparents. Or does OP have proof otherwise? So lame!!!