A keeper of the flame

By Frank Santarpia

November 21, 2012

 I tried.  I honestly and truly tried to get on board with the idea that the Republican Party must now make a left turn and charge hard towards the center. I listened to all the faultless logic; I processed all the reasonable arguments; I even, for a brief time, tried to convince others that yes, it appears as if the political winds of America have shifted irretrievably away from conservatism.

That’s right, in the disappointing aftermath of election night I swallowed it, and for a few days I even managed to keep it down.  But it treated me just like cheap whiskey treats some poor sot who guzzles too much to make the nightmares go away – it poisoned my system and I regurgitated the whole mess.  I flushed it from my life, hopefully for good.

The United States of America does not need two left-wing parties, and in my opinion those who believe that they can make the Republican Party more palatable to left-wing voters are fooling themselves.  No Republican will ever be able to move as far left as the Leftists – the Democrats simply won’t let you.

Want to talk about a path to citizenship?  They’ll talk about blanket amnesty.  Want to shift all the way over to amnesty?  They’ll talk about open borders.  Want to talk about taxing the rich?  They’ll re-define rich.  Want to extend unemployment benefits to two years?  Three?  How about forever?

You get the picture.  We will never out-left the Left.  Trying to do so is not reasonableness – it is capitulation.  If you are a Republican, you will always be positioned to the right of what has become the Democratic Party, and hence you will forever be painted a racist, homophobic, xenophobic cretin who, shockingly, probably still believes in God.

The truth is that we must do everything in our power to preserve conservatism in our nation.  We must preserve it for our children and grandchildren, because if we let it slip away in exchange for the cheap coin of political expediency, we will be, in effect, condemning them.  We will condemn them to a world devoid of a place they can go where each man is judged on his own merits, where each man can lift himself as far and as high as his spirit and his talent will take him, where each man will be protected by the rule of law and not the whim of a someone seeking votes or favor.

I believe in compromise – most of life is compromise.  But these basic values, these core beliefs – especially in the rule of law – these must survive, and they must survive in and through us.

We owe it to the future generations of every man and woman alive on the planet today.  For the sake of a few votes are we to deny to them the pure love of existence that only true freedom brings? Are we to smother the future achievements of a free individual working in a free marketplace?  Are we to take part in the effort to make that most glorious document – the Constitution of the United States – a curious relic that has no application in the modern world?

We must not.  We must leave the light of freedom and conservatism burning in the window, regardless of the cost.

Someday, our children – all children – will seek to come home to it.  Consider yourself a keeper of the flame.

Stay safe, stay strong, and God bless you.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “A keeper of the flame

  1. Indeed written by a mutual heart. My parents came to America after experiencing European Socialism, a concept due to raise the most horrific consequence of government control. I never thought in my lifetime see in America what my parents painfully described of Europe… Yes, the Europe America’s founders ultimately fled as did my parents….

  2. Off the cliff you go with the rest of rabid tea-baggers. You have learned nothing from this election. Americans are rejecting you racist old party and demographics are against you. bye-bye

  3. You ascribe meritocracy, getting ahead, the rule of law (especially the rule of law) to conservatism. As you know, from our meeting, I am Liberal and believe and do what I can to support all those values. Our main difference appeared to be the relation of property rights and human rights. I always hoped we could continue our discussion – but you never replied to my invitations. Why is that?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s