"I think of a liberal as someone who knows that a burden shared becomes light for all- and therefore supports pooled resources for the poor, the homeless, the jobless, the orphaned, the neglected and the exploited"

I can't speak for all conservatives. I can only tell you the type of people around whom I was raised. They are conservative because:

1. though they agreed with the worthiness of the goals you outline, they didn't see the methods of dealing with them, as put forth and instituted by centralized government, as meeting those goals.

And the more cynical among us actually saw the programs implemented to meet those goals were actually, whether intentional or un, both making the problems worse AND creating a government machinery that could become an even bigger problem -- such as it has now under a Republican government (whether you want to note that as ironic or not is up to you. I do ). When you build a really big monster (government), don't be surprised when he's too big for you to control either. Monsters don't behave -- even for the ones who create them. (remember that oldie from the early 60s "The Snake"?)

"...and feels strongly that a dollar spent in intervention at an impressionable age is better than 5 dollars spent 15 or 20 years later in the criminal justice system."

No problem whatsoever with this goal. Don't even see it as a conservative/liberal issue until you start trying to decide what is most effective "intervention at an impressionable age"

"I think of a liberal as less punitive, to begin with."

I'll grant you that one. I think that that's pretty self-evident with very few exceptions.

But if we were to look into the "why" of that difference, I think we'd find a very interesting discussion. I'm sure I'm either wrong or overstating the case (I'm sure someone here will correct me :^) )but the differences in approach as regards crime and punishment...

The liberal is proudly empathetic. Empathy is one thing I constantly hear liberals hail proudly as their domain. Interestinly, it is also very high on the list of things also claimed as characteristic of intellectuals.

And this is where that liberal intellectual "obstinance" thing comes into play -- that attempt to show that the truth isn't in the obvious. I think that to the liberal intellectual it is ASSUMED that one would feel empathy for the victim of a crime. The attractive thing to the intellectual liberal though, is in glomming onto the less obvious -- and empathy for the criminal. Because this seems the less obvious choice as an object for empathy, it feeds the liberal's sense of himself as more intellectual. Plus, the liberal tends to percieve itself as brighter, more intelectual than the rest of society and, as such, see its role of defending the criminal as a moral crusade against a society that is not bright enough to feel appropriate empathy for the criminal. The liberal sees himself in a messianic role for the criminal.

But as the conservative views it, he also has empathy for the criminal. It's just that in his judgement, that empathy -- an empathy that no humanitiarian would deny, cannot overide either the empathy for the victim, or the safety of the community.

Further....I think that to a certain extent there is a misunderstanding between conservative and liberal POVs on crime and punishment that is characterized sorta like...

The liberal's empathy for the criminal manifests itself in "how would I wish to be treated if I were in his shoes" -- but asking from the POV that the criminal's act was the fault of society.

The conservative's empathy for the criminal manifest itself in "what strategy would most likely keep me from committing this act again" -- but asking from the point of view that crime is a volitional act counter to personal responsibility.

Both are empthetic to the criminal. Both say "there but for the grace of God go I" (though the liberal is far more likely not to bring God into the issue *BG). But when one is putting themselves in the criminal's shoes, they want mercy from society -- even if it doesn't cure the problem -- after all, it's society's fault that the crime was committed in the first place. When the other is putting themselves in the criminal's shoes, his main criterion for what he expects done to him is what will be better for society and what will decrease crime in general.

"I think of a liberal as someone who is always learning, even though s/he recognizes that changing and releasing long-cherished but ultimately wrong ideas can be painful."

I like to think that I'm always learning too. It didn't really occur to me to assume that liberals didn't feel the same way. :^)