sort of a follow-up on the tiny dick theory... to be more forest-from-the-trees about these people's motivatioin, it's just anger. for some reason or other they are mad or disgruntled. they have an axe to grind, stemming from some disappointment or inadequacy in their own lives (past or present), and their personality begins reflecting that inner (or outer) anger, spraying it everywhere like a shotgun.
they love war, they love militarism and combat and conflict and friction. it gives them an identity and feeds their lust for some perceived retribution. and for them war is a video game - they are not impacted in the least by other people's family and friends dying. they call them heroes and put little yellow magnetic ribbons on their car, proclaiming patriotism. then they lambaste liberals for being anti-american because we question the legitimacy of the rationale (or in this case, lack thereof) that supposedly warrants these sacrifices.
it explains how people can believe such obviously false information. it's the same reason that battered wives stay with abusive husbands. never underestimate the power of wanting so badly to cling to a defunct ideal and avoid admitting mistakes. it's the reason george w. bush and the neo-con agenda are so seemingly teflon.
notice in any debate or call-in show how quickly irate right-wing advocates become. their voices raise, they use words like "idiot" and "stupid" in a coarse manner. this is not to say that liberals don't do it as well, but i listen to alot of call-in shows and read copius letters-to-the-editor and blogs and all else politico, and it's very noticeable that republican supporters predominate and incite the shouting match nine times out of ten.
bill o'reilly frequently tells his guests to "shut up" - always a great comeback. remember the keynote address zell miller (officially a democrat, but whatever) delivered at the republican convention? and schwarzenegger calling democrats "economic girly-men"? maybe i'm remembering selectively, but i don't recall alot of slander and name-calling at the democratic convention.
incidentally, how does increasing the volume of your voice strengthen your argument?