Republicans Vote Their Values, Democrats Are Driven By Issues.

* "Values:" "Important and lasting beliefs or ideals shared by the members of a culture about what is good or bad and desirable or undesirable. Values have a major influence on a person's behavior and attitude and serve as broad guidelines in all situations." (Definition from the Business Dictionary on line.)

* "Issues:" Topics for discussion or debate.

* Now, before any liberals give up on me, please allow me to explain. I am not suggesting that all liberals have no set of values by which they live. What I am suggesting is that whereas many liberals will comport themselves in their personal lives, often according to what might be considered a conservative set of values, they do not view public policy issues through the same lens. The result is that my fellow conservatives are often perplexed by what appears to be liberal illogic, inconsistency and even hypocrisy. A few examples.

* Abortion. As the killing of an unborn baby makes liberals uncomfortable, they have come to call abortion "a woman's right to choose." Once this became a "feminist issue" liberals jumped on the bandwagon. California Penal Code Section 187(a) defines "murder" as "the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought." It is not murder, however, if "the act was solicited,aided, abetted, or consented to by the mother of the fetus." In no other instance of unlawful killing is the crime of murder negated by the giving of consent by a third person. Illogical? Inconsistent? Hypocritical?

* Al Gore sells Current TV to Al Jazeera. Like President Obama, Gore was fond of saying the rich should pay more in taxes. Except he apparently had the sale go through on December 31, 2012 in order to avoid the higher capital gains taxes effective January 1, 2013. Current TV was said not to take ads from oil companies, given Gore's concern for the environment. But Al Jazeera is owned by the emir of Qatar, a country known for its oil production. But $100 million dollars, Gore's share of the sale proceeds, can apparently minimize the environmental impact.

* And, as the left believes all cultures, and hence all media outlets regardless of their origin, are equal, so no problem in selling to Al Jazeera. As the co-founder of Current TV said: "...Al Jazeera was founded with the same goals we had...to give voice to those voices...not typically heard; to speak truth to power; to provide independent and diverse points of view; and to tell the important stories that no one else is telling." Maybe that would be like the show "Sharia and Life," in which the host said "Oh, Allah, take this oppressive Jewish, Zionist band of people. Oh Allah, do not spare a single one of them. Oh Allah, count their numbers and kill them, down to the very last one." So Gore wanted to give voice to this hate speech? Did I mention $100 million? So, again, inconsistency? Hypocrisy?

* School vouchers. Liberals, like conservatives, believe in education. They want their kids to get the best education possible. In order to get that excellent education many liberals will send their own children to private schools. But are they in favor of school vouchers so that poor people can also send their own kids to the best schools? No. We have to protect public schools, not to mention the teachers. Inconsistent? Hypocritical?

* Welfare and food stamps. Many liberals have worked very hard for everything they have in life. They could not even conceive of being on the public dole. Work hard and you can enjoy life's rewards. But that's not "fair." It's not "equal." So under Obama food stamp recipients grew from 34 million to 47 million. Do liberals object? Do they suggest that creating dependency on government destroys an individual's desire and motivation to work and succeed on their own? Inconsistency?

* Overpopulation? On one occasion I was told by a liberal that the US is overpopulated, putting too much strain on the environment. So, I was advised that my kids should only have one child each. I then inquired if that same individual would be in favor of some type of barrier at our southern border. After all, millions have come here illegally. And they tend to produce multiple offspring themselves, adding millions more to the population. But I did not get agreement. There was no interest in limiting illegal immigration to the US. Inconsistent? You bet. Even my liberal friend admitted the inconsistency. But he still adhered to his inconsistent positions because he favored illegal immigration. The "issue" prevailed over all else, including logic, consistency and common sense.

* Guns. Gun control has been a favorite issue for the left, especially since Sandy Hook. Does it matter that gun control does not work? No. Look at Chicago and Washington, D.C. Very high murder rates with very strict gun control laws. Does it matter that many liberals are themselves protected by armed security, including our top public officials, and many in the entertainment world? No. Those very same people will propose stricter gun controls. Senator Diane Feinstein wants to bring back the so-called "assault weapons ban." But she is on record saying that she had a permit to carry and would take out anyone trying to kill her. Inconsistency? Hypocrisy?

* Because liberals are "issue" driven in the public policy arena, the "values" that they may live by do not come into play in the policy positions they take. This often results in illogical inconsistencies and apparent hypocrisy. Conservatives, however, do not detach their personal value system from the way they view the world. There is no collision between what Prager would call the macro and the micro for conservatives. If liberals voted the way they live (on their values) rather than on issues, Republicans would hold most elected offices in the country. But good luck to my conservative friends in trying to get a liberal to see the inconsistency between their conduct and their policy positions.