Dr. Zero's Essential Fusion Reaction

Over at Hot Air today, Dr. Zero has a great article about the Essential Fusion of social conservatism and fiscal conservatism. Cue the applause. It’s not like I haven’t been arguing that point for some time now – conservatives and moderates, conservatives and Republicans, social conservatives and fiscal conservatives and national defense conservatives all have something in common, despite their differences. The issue is not supposed to be about Rush versus Powell, or Newt versus Hoffman. The real issue is about current conservatism versus invasive socialism. A united front is needed in the face of a common enemy.

An aside implied in Dr. Zero’s appraisal, is the idea of fighting liberal emotional fire with conservative emotional fire. He says don't use pie charts to make your points. Damn it though, the pie charts prove so much!

I get his point though. Repeating the phrase "proven to fail" ad nauseum, could be just as effective as the liberals’ mantra-chanting of "Bush lied, people died". Although I wonder how many people that lie actually converted, as opposed to just solidified in beliefs of diehard liberals. There's no way to tell. “Proven to fail” has truth on its side too. Supposed solutions that have proven to fail time and again, have been evident both here and abroad.

“Proven to fail” sounds catchy. It doesn't even need a pie chart. But as a fiscal conservative, I'm going to keep the chart in my back pocket in case someone asks.

To be honest, that's the kind of convert I want, not a Marc Antony* following mob of mindless drones who would rather munch popcorn and be seduced by a good speech than ask serious questions of the speaker. As a conservative, that's how we are wired.

*Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;

I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him;
The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones,
So let it be with Caesar ... The noble Brutus
Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Caesar answered it ...
Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest,
(For Brutus is an honourable man;
So are they all; all honourable men)
Come I to speak in Caesar's funeral ...

But hey, that's just me. Rahm Emmanuel and Saul Alinsky get it, although they see those people as useful idiots who will vote with their emotions that can be easily manipulated. I'm a purist but I understand the need to get an emotional response from the listener some times. Perhaps these are such times.

Rush Limbaugh has often pointed out the flaws of feel-good-liberalisms and why it’s not a principle to be governed by. But he fails to move on to the next logical point in that line of thinking. Many people will always, only vote with their hearts and not their heads. Getting through to them is tough, and pie charts and logic make it harder, not easier. It’s a conservatives are from Mars, liberals are from Venus type problem. If you want to win over the unconvinced, you have to at least speak their language.

Let’s face it; the right of the blogosphere is full of wonks who can recite lines from a 1900 page bill. That fails to connect with most of the non-choir part of the right as much as the GOP party insiders who thrust Scozzafava upon NY23 in a smarter-than-thou fit-a-pique more attenuated to Democrat sensibilities than liberty-loving conservatives. And if we can’t convince the less attuned conservatives on a regular basis, how can we get moderates and nervous liberals to consider our side of the story?

That’s right – we’ve got to talk to their feelings. At least until we can start to get them asking the questions where we get to start showing our pie charts…