Conservatives Think, Liberals Feel

According to author and New York Times blogger Judith Warner, women (women Democrats, that is) are having sex dreams about Obama. No surprise there. When you've been catapulted to Hollywood status, such dreams are inevitable. Thank God Brad Pitt's the only person who has surfaced in my dreams. Course I didn't vote for Obama -- plus when it comes to politics, I'm governed by my head, not my heart.

That's such a critical difference between conservatives and liberals. Once again, don't confuse modern liberals with classic liberals. There are plenty of thinking Democrats; I know many of them personally. But classic liberal Democrats are more in line with the Kennedys and Joe Lieberman: They may lean left but they're still traditional-minded. Modern liberals, those who think Obama walks on water, don't think. They feel. As journalist John Fund writes, "While Republicans tend to nominate their best-known candidate from previous nomination battles, Democrats often fall in love during a first date."

Which is precisely what happened with Obama. Not only is he a virtual unknown, he has no track record people can point to and say "Here's why I like him. Here's what he's done." Instead liberals fell in love with the idea of something. They fell in love with what they believe Obama represents, what they hope he'll represent for them in the end. Ideas and hopes are feelings, not facts. Democrats fell in love.

Indeed, a modern liberal's arguments almost always revolve around feelings, while conservatives tend to stick to facts and well-reasoned arguments. Here's an example. When Dinesh D'Souza wrote a book called The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 911, left-leaning Americans became enraged. Rather than read the book and actually learn something, they attacked D'Souza for daring to suggest that liberals had anything to do with 911. Subtitles can do that -- rile people up. It's supposed to call attention to the book so that people pick it up and read it. Then, if they disgree, they're free to challenge the arguments put forth by the author.

I should know. I've already said the same thing happened to me with my book. D'Souza and I aren't the only authors who've had this happen. There are plenty of books that challenge people's intellect, but liberals won't read these books. They're too busy being offended. As another example, here are some quotes from bookstores (another liberal bastion in America, as they employ primarily university folks who are notoriously left wing) that were sent to a publisher of conservative, intellectual-type books:

"Please take me off your contact list. If you want to reach a narrow-minded audience,try the small-town rags."

"Please take me off your mailing list. We do NOT sell fascist publications."

"Pseudo-scholarly wingnut screeds which purport to be philosophical musings."

"This book is filled with lies! Don't read it!"

"I find some of your titles to be offensive and outright simple-minded. I will not sell your titles in any of my stores so please do not promote any of these ridiculous books to me!"

"Your books make my blood boil."

"Your offerings are offensive."

"You are surely a collection of right-wing nut jobs."

"You must be insane."

When my own book was released and there was an article in my local newspaper, people wrote letters to the editor. One group of "educationally diverse liberal women" said they would never read such a horrid book and referred to me as "Mrs. Venker" as opposed to "Ms. Venker" -- reflecting my "regressive stance" regarding women, they wrote. They opened their letter with this statement: "What mother of toddlers wears dangly earrings anyway?" (referring to the picture of me in the article). Why did they attack me personally? Because they couldn't refute my argument.

What I remember most about that experience was that my neighbor across the street -- who's a lifelong, "thinking" Democrat, left-leaning but quite traditional -- was shocked. I recall thinking that she has no idea what her party has morphed into. She still lives with the notion that being Democrat means what it meant during the Kennedy years. And while this may the case for her, and for many people like her, it is not the case for modern Democrats who hold the most of the power today.

Indeed, Obama makes people feel good. He doesn't challenge the status quo, rock the boat, or make people think. He wants to be loved, and he wants things to be fair. To him fair means spreading the wealth. This warms a liberal's heart -- because liberals consider themselves good people. To them, being good means giving. The fact that by giving you're ultimately holding people back is of no consequence. It's all about the good feelings of giving and the fact that afterward things look fair. Conservatives see fairness in terms of inherent rights -- as in, making sure things are fair across the board -- and want to help people help themselves. Liberals are concerned solely with outcomes -- as in, how things are handled in the process isn't nearly as important as making sure the result itself appears equal. Whether it really is or not is beside the point.

In my next few blogs I'll explain in greater detail what I mean.

1 Response to “Conservatives Think, Liberals Feel”:

  1. fen331 says:

    it's terrible, liberals are a very intolerant prejudice people. i have delt with them on the internet. They seem to lie knowingly, and skirt issues and resort to personal attacks. They don't stick to issues. It's more about ego. And that's the issue. They stand for ego. for self. For greed. They are selfish liars. Persuasion not truth. That's their goal. They don't want to discuss things. They believe in the lie. They think it's academically intelectual. Truth doesn't exist, just evil lawyers.

    I don't agree with addage. Feel is something everyone does. you can be honest and feel the truth. The thing is liberals are dishonest and feel the greed. that's the issue.