I find it to be a wonderful feeling.
I've loved watching the tête à tête between the 24-hour news and this extremely important science community. More than once, extraordinary claims have been made and completely overblown by the media. Meanwhile, these talented scientists have remained levelheaded, critical, and extremely careful in their announcements. Watching the FTL[0] discussions, for example, was just so much fun. It actually gave me more faith in humanity to see so many people fact checking each other and challenging each other to prove something in civilized ways.
[0] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anom...
The design of these detectors are rather different, and they are build by different team, yet are are giving consistent results.
So of course they are common assumptions, but they did do their homework to try to mitigate this.
Still, I have a similar feeling, that there may be some hidden 'tuning' to make things match, or some assumptions or values that have been erroneously determined or set.
It's enough to say that the standard model has to have some input from the real world -- mostly the masses of the particles and their mixing angles. Renormalization just makes it harder to talk about what a particle's mass "really" is; it doesn't really increase the number of parameters in the theory.
[0] Effectively the basic rate of things happening per particle/energy/volume of spacetime etc., originally assumed to be constant. [1] Effectively things happening faster for certain types of interactions (electromagnetic vs. weak vs. strong).