Strong idea, weak proof

This research-study story from the Toronto Star should be taken with a grain of salt the size of a small planet, but it leads into an idea I've been thinking about for a while - the odd relationship between liberals, conservatives and courage.

The gist is this: Conservatives so often paint liberals as cowards who don't have the spine to face the tough issues of the day, particularly issues like war and national security. But isn't the whole conservative proposition an exercise in cowardice? Isn't every right-wing campaign based on some speciously-reasoned terror? We must spend billions fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because the terrorists are scary. We must deny gay marriage because "the gays" would uproot the moral fabric of society and because gay marriage would inevitably lead to horses marrying 10-year-old boys. We must not regulate markets or have socialized medicine because that makes us Communists, and Communists are scary. 

On almost every issue, the conservative argument is based on being afraid. Afraid of change, afraid of the future. And yet conservatives succeed quite regularly at playing the tough guys, disguising cowardice as courage.

I'm not suggesting that the liberal proposition is perfect, but I just don't see the same dissonance between the public image and the principles that drive it.