There is a fundamental difference between Conservatives and Liberals, one that will never be resolved. No one on either side will ever truly understand the other because of this difference. The Liberal rules from the heart and Conservatives rule from the head. Liberals use emotion to ramp up whatever audience is their target into a frenzy of feelings. They do it with everything. Think how may times you have responded emotionally to a situation only to, given a little time and thought, come to a reasoned conclusion that is the opposite of your gut reaction, which perhaps was brought on by being among other people having that same gut reaction. The recent Sandy Hook murders are the perfect example of how the Liberal rules. It is nearly always reactionary and hasty. It is always portrayed as solving all the ills of the world, healing the sick, eradicating the poor, providing for those who cannot provide for themselves. They are immensely successful at presenting themselves as the only ones who "care". They insist they are the good guys and everyone else are the evil people who won't help the little people for any reason. They rarely give thought to the consequences of their actions and when it proves disastrous, they manage to deflect responsibility onto anyone but themselves. Liberals are aided by their Liberal friends in the mainstream media and Hollywood. I cannot recall the last time I turned on the television and heard any of the talking heads on the “big 3” speak glowingly or even grudgingly of conservatism's success. Because Liberals rule from the heart, it is much easier for them to garner the attention of the voter or even nonvoter and convince them that what they say is true. Even more important, they are in agreement with each other always. There is very little division or disagreement among the Liberals. They present a united front because, for the most part, they are united in their beliefs and seem to be able to quash anyone on their own side who might dare to speak out against them. Liberals never seem to suggest any of their fellow travelers should set aside their personal beliefs for the “good of the party”.
Because the Conservative rules from logic, reason and tradition, there will never be total agreement on what constitutes a Conservative. Unlike the Liberal, we tend to think independently of the whole and decide for ourselves what makes up our conservatism. We tend to police our own, sometimes wrongly, sometimes rightly, but we never excuse bad behavior. There are a great many of us who have the same beliefs and mores, but we rarely agree who in the political arena best represents us. Hence, we have a primary like we had last year, full of division and disagreement. However, it seems that because Conservatives are not united in the same way Liberals are it puts us at a disadvantage. We have two strong halves of a whole, fiscal and social conservatism. Not all of us embrace both halves. We pick and choose what works best for us as individuals. We argue among ourselves about who is the most conservative. Some insist those who do embrace the social side of conservatism must relinquish those values in order to “win”. No one seems to ever suggest those who embrace fiscal conservatism relinquish any part of their vision.
So where does this leave us? How do we go about finding the candidate who represents both sides as equally as possible? Which of us must sacrifice our personal values for the “good of the Party”? Who among us is best capable of carrying and conveying the entire message of conservatism? I don't have the answers, but my personal opinion is this. If we continue to nominate candidates who are not truly conservative, we cannot expect them to take our message to the people in a believable manner. Rarely is there a candidate who is able to present themselves as something they are not and have the voting public believe them. That is, unless you are a Liberal.