The "dialogue" will continue in its futilely circular narrative pose
and counterpose mode, (liberal vs. conservative) until or unless
additional data is added to explicitly show that the respective
parties are not operating from same capability set.  Political
Conservatives represent a neurotype that reflexively rejects data
culled from emotional perceptions and cognition.  This is not to say
they are rational, or unemotional, simply that they are not capable
of viewing the world through their emotional center.  They are
without exception, utterly language bound.  There are even
stereotypical patterns to their writing and speech that disclose
their predicament.

OK, I mentioned clarifying data, so here's the phenomenon;

http://www.canoe.ca/Health0005/10_brain.html

So thinking in terms of essence and personality, persona being
literally a "mask" - the question goes begging, no screaming its
plea - WTF is being "masked"?

http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1271998

In his book  "Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces And
Feelings To Improve Communication And Emotional Life." Ekman
describes how facial expressions work. For example, he can tell the
difference between a fake and a real smile by mapping the muscle
movements of both. Ekman is professor of psychology in the
department of psychiatry at the University of California Medical
School, San Francisco. He frequently consults for government
agencies like the FBI. "

So the face, which is exquisitely wired for expressivity registers
emotions that happen exponentially faster than thought. In essence,
infants are all queued in to this system, it is their lifeline to
communication and survival. It's also a world of pain
(rejection/acceptence dyad) when in short order they see expressions
that instinctively register with them as less than positive. So the
organism begins construction of the "persona" at this time as a
buffering mechanism.

I have repeatedly argued that emotions comprise  
a separate modality of intelligence, rooted in instinct/essence and
with connections to the deeper processes that sustain and give rise
to our structure and functions. OK, you can think your ass off for
as long as you like, but unless you jack into the emotions, you
don't have a prayer of getting at the low level processes that
really count as far as apprehension of deep structure, either your
ontological and epistemological own deep structure, or, the deep
structure in which your/our organisms are embedded.

Microexpressions reveal one's emotional content and more
particularly whether one's emotions are in keeping with what one
wishes the world to see.

Political Conservatives represent a neurotype that reflexively rejects data culled from emotional perceptions and cognition.  This is not to say they are rational, or unemotional, simply that they are not capable of viewing the world through their emotional center.  They are without exception, utterly language bound.  There are even stereotypical patterns to their writing and speech that disclose their predicament.

I don't recall if the Ekman interview on NPR actually covered the particulars of "microexpressions" carefully enough - most particularly their speed.

"Liar, Liar? "The face lies and the face leaks," said Paul Ekman in his presentation on facial expressions and deception. He described the value of interpreting facial "microexpressions," which may only last 1/25th of a second but reveal a person's true intent.

Microexpressions, and the messages they convey, become much more apparent when viewed using slow-motion video, though trained observers can spot them instantly. They are often involuntary muscular movements of which the speaker is unaware. "Facial expressions that contain an involuntary movement that is difficult to make voluntarily are the most reliable," added Ekman. Taken in context with the pitch of a person's voice, microexpressions are a "very real source of information."

The peculiar tendencies of conservatives are stereotypical characteristics that can be discerned and catalogued. Taken in combination, the peculiarities of facial expression, body language, and writing style could be combined to produce extremely reliable indications of one's neurological proclivities.

Genuine creatives in conservative cultures share in common the "itch you can't scratch". This "itch" arises from the nagging sense that something's not quite right about the world. The feeling that something's not quite right about the world coincides with the failure to microsync body language with that of the dominant population, and, the peripheral awareness of conflict between the true feelings and the personae of others subconsciously observed in their facial expressions.

Take for example the small child's ability (with high survival value) to read the faces of strangers and discern their internal states and motives. There's no magical endowment from above, though there may well be an unusual neurological correlate to the ability.

As far as the "itch you can't scratch" goes. I recall knowing that most adults are liars long before I was cognizent of other forms of routine paradox. Perhaps others can recount their first indication hthat something wasn't right with the world?

Prelinguistic children perceive and respond to facial microexpressions that the majority of adults can't see. Their survival depends on this ability and it is thankfully an endowment from essence. Unless one is neurologically predisposed to this, one will never notice anything odd about themselves or others.