Does Mitt Romney have a conscience?

[tcaudilllg]

Your opinion.

[marooned]

It's hard to tell. Perhaps he is rather oblivious, but possibly well-intentioned in his own manner of being well-intentioned which I imagine doesn't jive too well with me. I don't know why but any time I see him on TV I start getting this bad feeling. It probably equates to just wondering if I knew him if I would trust him at all or find him entirely unrelatable. Perhaps I simply see him as foreign. It's not just him though, I mean with a lot of political figures you just wish you could dig under their smile and see what's really there or something.

[glam]

Your opinion.

this reminds me of something i was discussing with someone else just a few days ago.

i think Romney does have a conscience, in the sense that he recognizes what is supposedly right vs wrong according to some belief system, but it may be harder for liberals (and i mean "liberal" in the American sense, referring to left-wingers) to easily accept this because conservatives' idea of morality is different from liberals' idea of morality.

i might even argue that because of their values, conservatives (including Romney) are even more concerned with being & appearing "moral" than liberals are. conservatives value competition (leading to winners & losers) and the idea of self-sufficiency; the idea is that the "winners" are the ones who have earned what they have (whether it be money, status, etc.) through hard-work and pursuing their self-interest, which shows that they are self-sufficient and are therefore "moral" people. thus these moral "winners" have earned a position of moral authority.

Romney also subscribes to a religion that tells its members that they are part of the "one true church"; only by becoming a Mormon and completing the necessary requirements (such as various temple rituals) will one be truly righteous and thus able to enter the highest level of heaven to be with God. Mormonism is a religion i find to be more typically "strict" than your average mainstream American Christianity; this "strictness" goes right along with conservative ideas of morality, which is why a majority of American Mormons vote Republican.

as a political liberal and non-religious person, i do not share these worldviews and do not necessarily find them "moral". so i can & do disagree, but who am i to judge? due to his conservatism and Mormon beliefs, i would not be surprised if Romney thought of himself as an extremely moral person.

[glam]

It's not just him though, I mean with a lot of political figures you just wish you could dig under their smile and see what's really there or something.

i think it's interesting how people often look at politicians like they are creatures from another planet. i think it's easier if you look at politicians like anyone else, as people. many may find politicians to be fake and unreal, but i just remember that there are plenty of "regular" people out there who also pander, plaster fake smiles on, and pretend like they care about you.

[Aquagraph]

Most people have conscience but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[aixelsyd]

No.

[marooned]

i think it's interesting how people often look at politicians like they are creatures from another planet. i think it's easier if you look at politicians like anyone else, as people. many may find politicians to be fake and unreal, but i just remember that there are plenty of "regular" people out there who also pander, plaster fake smiles on, and pretend like they care about you.

I don't think Romney is fake and unreal per se, but I feel unable to see anything with him. I also don't know if Romney necessarily doesn't care... he may be quite well meaning. I don't know him. I do suspect his lifestyle is incredibly foreign to mine and that it would be like walking into a different reality to walk into it. My feelings about Romney may be really arbitrary and they're certainly not formed impressions (they haven't even gotten to that level and I don't know if they ever can because I will never know any of these people).

This could just be about image. Perhaps Romney is really bad at creating one that looks like you can see someone under there. Because I guess that on some level if one is to vote for a candidate they have to have some approximation of who that person is. Well, perhaps not. What they might be likely to do or not do may work better.

Okay, well if I really go into my suspicions... I suspect Romney probably is well meaning and is trying to be a "good guy." I suspect also that he has a lot of meetings with advisors about his "image" and tries to present himself in a way that will please as many people as possible. He's not as good at image as some previous candidates like Bill Clinton, for instance. Clinton I think was able to present a personality (even if it wasn't real--I don't know how much of it is or isn't but I did think that part of Clinton did actually care so it must have worked). With Romney maybe I see him as trying to please people again and I have no idea who he really is or what he really uh "stands for." Part of this is I haven't devoted a lot of time to Romney analyses. So I probably shouldn't comment. It's just difficult sometimes to keep my suspicions to myself and this seemed to be a reasonably non-serious topic since it was asking whether or not Romney has a conscience and obviously that's something that our opinions count on.

[Gilly]

But doesn't that inability to see anything beyond his facade make you suspicious in and of itself?

Sure does me.

[Gilly]

A guy who made his career as a digger in corporate graveyards CANNOT be implicitly granted trust. That's just fucking STUPID, people.

[Gilly]

Then again neither can a lawyer. But Romney is too Christian to the point that I can see him being influenced by the idea of a righteous "Holy" war with Iran.

[Beautiful sky]

Only a weak one and only one which he uses to get his own way.

omg, this is coming from his dual. ouch. Boyfriend better grow up.

[tcaudilllg]

I'm looking at it this way: he's an LSE. On the one hand, LSEs focus on obtaining money. On the other, they focus on making life better for those they care about. That I think is the red flag, that here we have an LSE who is essentially lost. I mean he supports all these policies that will make life worse, not better, for millions of people. The only people who will gain from them won't experience a net improvement in their lifestyles because they have all their needs met already. And, he has incredible amounts of money on top of that. What could possibly be motivating him?

[Gilly]

Control. Whether he knows it or not. He has had a lifetime of being the #1 breadwinner man, the decider of every factor in his own life and those of others to boot, including the men whose businesses he evaluated on likely-bullshit, self-serving premises before tearing them down for parts to sell to the highest bidder.

[munenori2]

I kinda lost all sympathy for the guy when some of the details of his bullying back in high school came out. It would have been less of a deal if he owned up to it but getting a group of guys together and pinning some kid down to cut his hair off because it looked too gay and then just saying, "Oh, I don't really recall that particular incident but if I hurt anyone in the past, my bad," makes him a massive twat imo.

[Saberstorm]

He is warrior for his tribe. Not a priest nor a missionary for it.

[Beautiful sky]

LSE: "We like to have control and command over things not because we want to control people but because we want to make sure things get done."

[rat1]

Mitt Romney is a puppet. You're acting like he makes his own decisions, as if his attitude will have anything to do with united states policies. It was known as fact in the 1980s a black president named barrack would be put into office following Bush and Clinton. Don't believe me I can show you. Romneys presence on the political stage has been tactfully selected and planned years in advance. The presidential race is so staged it should be made into a broadway musical. Nothing you see amongst the candidates, including the presence of Ron Paul and his struggle against censorship, is there by accident.

The candidates attitude only corresponds with policies, it does not determine them; as he is an actor placed there for an intended effect.

[Creepy-pokeball]

I want mormon underwear for halloween 2012 lol

[Gilly]

He is warrior for his tribe. Not a priest nor a missionary for it.

What?

Get the fuck out.

If you gave Mitt an M16 and dropped him in Baghdad, he would probably cry for mommy and run around making empty threats.

The man only cares about himself and maybe his family. Sure he's a "warrior" for them, but I bet that self-deluded mind of his can't even recognize that he would probably launch nukes to the detriment of the rest of us as long as he could keep them safe.

[Gilly]

LSE: "We like to have control and command over things not because we want to control people but because we want to make sure things get done."

This is actually very true IME but it makes him a bad candidate, not a good one. People shouldn't become president because they want to wrap their country in a protective blanket.

[PistolShrimp]

[tcaudilllg]

Dubya was LSE and he became president not because he wanted to "make sure things get done", but because his daddy was president before him.

Oh, and to remove Saddam Hussein.

[Pookie]

Dubya was LSE

i had always prescribed to the idea that Dubya was an Se-ego. Agree to disagree
__________________________________________________ ______________


Personally i think the majority of people in a position of power have deteriorated conscience. It's scientifically proven that with power comes a tendency to abuse it, simply by having the choice too. I think few at the top levels of government are in it for anything but themselves. There are exceptions, because there are always exceptions. But more often than not, the people who strive for power are the people who should not recieve it. It's a taoist proverb but - "The man that puts the world before himself is fit to rule the world" And it's almost contradictory for a person to value the world around them with equal footing as oneself and still strive for a position of personal glorification.

But i do like Obama. I think he's genuinely trying to do what he feels is right, and that's good enough for me. Regardless if whether i believe he's right.

[Absurd]

[Beautiful sky]

I want mormon underwear for halloween 2012 lol

[tcaudilllg]

I think I've drawn a bead on why the Right wants to beat Obama so badly. To wit, they are so terrified of being labeled racist that they are determined to find other reasons to oppose him. I think this came to the forefront today with the Jeremiah Right ad controversy, where Romney remarked that such a campaign would be "the wrong course".

Regarding Romney, I think Saber hit the nail on the head: he's allowing his feelings to be colored by his culture, as most LSEs secretly do, and as such, believes himself crusading for Mormon values. Indeed there are arguments for Mormon emergence as one of the foundations of the Religious Right. So basically this is a choice of Mormon vs secular. If Romney is elected, Mormons will be running the country like never before.

[Beautiful sky]

This is actually very true IME but it makes him a bad candidate, not a good one. People shouldn't become president because they want to wrap their country in a protective blanket.

LSE are not altruists nor are they humanists; they "wrap the country in a protective blanket" for personal reasons.

[Gilly]

LSE are not altruists nor are they humanists; they "wrap the country in a protective blanket" for personal reasons.

Exactly.

[tcaudilllg]

Personal reasons = Fi suggestive?

[Beautiful sky]

Personal reasons = Fi suggestive?

Yes. I would think that's right and why they are attracted to me, as in, I give them those personal reasons that they long for... because I do things for personal reasons; I don't things for selfish reasons, I don't do it because it makes me feel better, but because it makes the other person feel better and better off.

[Gilly]

Yes. I would think that's right and why they are attracted to me, as in, I give them those personal reasons that they long for... because I do things for personal reasons; I don't things for selfish reasons, I don't do it because it makes me feel better, but because it makes the other person feel better and better off.

...and knowing THAT makes you feel better.

[Beautiful sky]

...and knowing THAT makes you feel better.

I'm not certain of that, Gilly. I am often tortured, emotionally because I know that; I can have very bad depressions that sink inwards from "knowing" things because of how I see the world around me and how I view my position in the world. For instance, I was at the park a few weeks ago and I saw some dead leaves on the ground and looked up at the tree to find baby leaves; the circle of what we call "life" appeared in one sequential shot, right in front of me and that very thought caused a deep and desperate change of reactions that depressed me. Essentially, what I was picturing was life/span of living/death; that is what everything here is; it doesn't matter what people do; how they can contribute, what they wish, they can never escape from the rule of nature; I feel that I've often wanted to just end it. To escape the uselessness of this circle because it's going to come anyway. I think this sort of thinking comes from knowing or realizing things. Realization and knowing aren't often things that make me feel better. They are also not things that will make me act in any way more differently, perhaps more so empathetically because I realize and know what becomes of all of us, and everything around us; so, I sort of say "act with gentleness because life is meaningless and it's no ones' fault. But, we are slaves to nature and natural rules. We exist beyond our control, even if we controlled our decision to live; some life will spring up instead of us...we become the necessitation for more life."

So, I realize what's happening doesn't mean I don't want it to stop; I would rather not be needed, not be wanted even for the spec of insignificant time that I exist; but, people say they want me, my mom says she needs me; I'll exist until such time that I can feel that I'm of no longer want or need and then I can end myself. I want the choice to be my own. I think it hurt me to hurt other people, especially my loved ones; I think I would be too selfish because I know how they look upon the world, which is quite differently than that of my own views; denying them of my company when they so desperately want that by taking my choices upon my hand is a very selfish thing to do.

[tcaudilllg]

Maritsa there are many people you can help, and each well-intentioned dream is special. Helping people find a peaceful place in the world is a significant and worthwhile endeavor.

[Beautiful sky]

Maritsa there are many people you can help, and each well-intentioned dream is special. Helping people find a peaceful place in the world is a significant and worthwhile endeavor.

It seems like a useless emotion from an intellectual standpoint. *honestly, what you said made me cry it's probably true* - infantile emotions...don't intellectualize about it and express your thoughts on it...but produce emotions and cry about it...arghh.