Intro to another person

[neffernin]

Hello,

I have been mostly an observer online for an extremely long time, generally reading CNN for my news and watching the polls fairly closely on RCP; reading comment sections to cnn or drudge or yahoo to get an idea of what people are thinking. My ride to work everyday is generally spent listening to NPR. I suppose much of my political news also comes from The Daily Show/Colbert Report as well; understanding that it is through the comedic lens.

I'm a fairly faithless person, nearly everything we do in society has been done before to some extent so there should be a precedent set that we can look back at and make logical deductions as to what our actions will lead to in the future. While there is some room for opinions in my beliefs, I think an opinion without factual evidence is fairly worthless.

What I am struggling with in life is it seems nearly everyone follows faith and emotion while logic, reason and truth are thrown aside. This is the exact reason I really enjoy watching Stewart/Colbert (2016) because they continuously make fun of the fact that truth means little in today's culture, especially politically. When I say I watch CNN, occasionally I'll catch an interview but I find it hard to stomach CNBC or Fox News just because they are too sensational (many of the things they do are obviously chasing ratings, not the truth). Also, not saying that Fox News is the same as CNBC; anyone with a sound mind would be able to spot the difference quickly in terms of intelligence of audience.

When talking about a topic, people quickly go to their talking points, their opinions and beliefs and are quick to discount truth and reason. I am a registered Democrat, will likely always vote down the ticket that way with no wavering in my decisiveness there, and nearly always agree with what their intentions are; yet I have no issue with pointing out the flaws in people's arguments on either side or playing devil's advocate when I do not see enough backing for an opinion. An example is in one thread people comment about how weird Mormonism is yet don't mention Harry Reid. I understand that collectively as a group Romney is the enemy, but I wonder if this is a topic that could be brought up here due to the partisan lens.

I went door to door for Kerry when I was 18 and the loss in that election made me feel disenfranchised, but I find myself more interested than ever. Maybe this isn't the right place to look for it, but I would love some true intellectual discourse so I can further understand why anyone in their right mind would want someone with the lack of honesty that Romney has produced be president.

Thanks,
Alex

[cyberswede]

1. Welcome to DU, Alex!

I hope you like it here!

[grr8wine]

2. Welcome Alex

I enjoyed reading your intro. I get my news the same as you, through humor w/ Stewart and Colbert, NPR on my drive to work. Occasionally CNN. Cannot stomach Fox News over on Bull Shit Mountain!

[neffernin]

3. :)

Thanks for the welcome! Maybe I can start to better understand the reasoning (or lack thereof) behind all of these damn lies in our political process.

[merrily]

5. I think it's called "I want to be elected."

That is the one "principle" that seems to unite most of the lies.

[merrily]

4. Hi. Maybe I have no room to reply, but I will give it a shot.

A lot of evidence in 2008 and 2012 points to the fact that even Republicans did not want Romney. He just happened to be the last man standing who was not Gingrich (too much baggage) or Santorum (too extreme to be electible).

Once Romney became the Party's nominee, they rallied behind him, unless their opposition to Mormonism outweighed their political loyalty. Then again, even Billy Graham caved on Mormonism.

My personal view is that, no matter what someone like Romney says before he is elected, you cannot trust what he will do after he is elected. That was certainly so in Massachusetts after he was elected Governor.

[neffernin]

6. There's no arguing

That the amount of desirable talent in the GOP is likely at an all-time low. As much as I don't like Gingrich, he's likely the most talented/experienced of them all. At least Cain was funny (his appearances on The Daily Show are hilarious). When you look at it and can use people like Romney and Gingrich as the most eligible for being the leader of the free world it speaks volumes as to where the Republican leadership is today.

It seems every person they try to propel into the national spotlight ends up having some baggage, ends up being too nutty or does not work out in some way.

It would be a breath of fresh air to see strong new leadership in the GOP, not because I want to see them take any further power than they have in the political system but maybe having a stronger GOP leadership will lead to a better country (and not more filibustering of bills and government stalemate).

[gracewriter2]

7. On Harry and Mormonism

Harry is not running for president. Big difference.

The problem with Romney being Mormon is that their prophet prophetized one day America would be in such dire circumstances it would need saved by a Mormon.

The problem with Mormonism is they think this planet was seeded from another planet and when they die, they get their own planets to rule over, even some women will get to rule their own planets.

I'm not making this up.

The way I see it, the reason why this man wants/needs to be president is he thinks it's providence. It's his rightful place to be our "savior."

This religion is just as goofy as Scientology. I've never taken Mormonism seriously or as a threat. Most Mormons, like Harry, are pretty cool even though their religion is a bit demented. But then I think all religions are pretty crazy and the reason why life on this planet is dangerous. Sure some religions do some good, but....

I'm speculating that Romney thinks being president not only fulfills the Mormon prophecy, but is the closest thing to being a God he can come to on this planet before he gets his very own.

In any event the person who scares me even more than Romney is his wife.

[neffernin]

8. I don't disagree at all

and I understand that it is because he's running for the highest office, but really, if a scientologist (Tom Cruise?) ran for any national office you can be assured it would be brought up (or denounced by the candidate).

I'd have to agree that my personal view is that religion is pretty wacky in general and is kind of amusing; the only difference between Catholicism and Mormonism is the amount of time it has been established and the amount of history it has. You can compare the two and say that Mormonism is the nuttier of the two, Joseph Smith and his seer stone which he used to defraud people with before he used it to start a religion.... but didn't Catholicism or Christianity in general basically cause much of the dark ages and set back science like 1500 years?

Your thetan level is high my friend gracewriter2, if you'd like I can introduce you to my order! ^^