I'd say that conservatives and libertarians begin at opposite ends. Conservatives begin with what could have been and ask how they can get back to that one possible past so as to preserve what's good about it and improve things. Libertarians on the other hand, start with what is, and ask how they can realize their dream of what could be. So of course we will disagree. It's the difference between what could have been for the conservative, and what can be for the libertarian. That is between taking people and the world as they were perceived to be in the past, and taking people as they are while looking at potential for what people can achieve in the future.
On social issues, many conservatives may want to get back to an earlier social condition, but they mostly just try to hold the line on pernicious social changes. Bush even promotes more government support for policies that he believes will strengthen families. By contrast, whether they want a sterner or a looser morality, libertarians tend to take a "root and branch" approach to pruning away government agencies and rules.
I'm not saying that the libertarian approach is wrong, just that it does seem to involve abstract blueprints and starting over again from scratch than the conservative way.