Personally, I think the term “RINO” is getting to be overused, and largely in ways that have nothing to do with somebody actually being a true to life RINO.
Most often, the term “RINO,” as used by FReepers, seems to mean one of two things:
1) You don’t agree with me 100% on every last thing, or
2) You refuse to join my third party.
I reject both of those as being legitimate uses of the term.
I agree that we’re seeing a political realignment, but it is one which involves CONSERVATIVES - not so-called “independents” (who can be of any political persuasion). Conservatives both within and without the GOP need to be involved in recapturing the GOP for conservatism and using it as a vehicle to advance our agenda. If we try to rely upon “independents” alone, especially in the form of some hokey “Tea Party Party,” then we’ll be playing a fool’s game. Independents are independent, in part, because they tend to be people who are less engaged with the process, less knowledgable about piolitics, less organised, and less ORGANISABLE.
One thing I am increasingly having less and less patience with is this nonsense about third parties. It’s to the point where I consider third partyism to be well-nigh treasonous to conservatism. It’s like somebody trying to come in, sow discord, and undercut the unity and strength of our movement. I notice that a lot of the third partyists seem move interested in bashing everyone else for not being as “pure” as they are, rather than they are in helping to move conservatism forward.
Which brings up the obvious question - if they’re just splitting conservatives into factions and sowing discord, can they really be considered “pure”? I do not think so.
It seems third parties go nowhere in our political system, be they the Bull Moose, Libertarian, Socialist, Conservative, et al. parties. Thus they are quite pointless distractions. One wonders why people engage in them at all. The explanation you give above is an astute one, and I think you hit the mark.
I'm not a champion of a "Tea Party Party"; to me, it's not needed. There is already a conservative party (or at least there used to be; it used to be called the Grand Old Party). Yet the Tea Party movement is conservative to its core. The one I attended in Boston drew Republicans, Libertarians, Democrats, and Independents. What unites such a disparate group is a common love for the Constitution and the system of liberty/limited government it establishes, plus disgust and anger over the arrogance, corruption, and profligacy of government in general.
IMHO such folks are natural conservatives, and as such are aligned with the historical principles and values of the Republican party, whether they realize it or not. But the GOP has been so totally lame in articulating these values and principles in recent times, that talk radio hosts at Tea Parties have to do it.... Not to mention GOP elected officials violate their constitutional oaths seemingly just as often as Democrats do. The public is growing cynical....
Not to quibble over language, but Tea Party folks are "independents" (with a lower-case "i") regardless of party affiliation, if any. That's because they are by and large "traditional Americans"; i.e., self-reliant, responsible, hard-working citizens who want to run their own lives rather than have some bureaucrat with a rubber-stamp run it for them. They don't like being "bossed around" by the gummint. They are deeply concerned about future generations of We the People — that they are being saddled with debts created to pay for "benefits" for our generation — which is encouraged to want everything "now" and to think that money grows on trees. Etc. They should be prime prospects for GOP "recruitment."
But the GOP seems to think it has to sell its soul to get them; e.g., all those "big tent" accommodations, especially on the most critical and divisive social issues. The party should be articulating, defending, and "selling" its core message instead. That's part of what it means to lead.
In short, I'm more conservative than the official Republican party is right now. It's moved way to the Left of me, and that's for sure. Which is why I left it. If it ever should come to its senses again, and return to its core conservative philosophy (and practice), I'll come back to it.
Otherwise, I need it as little as I need the Democrat party. Both are "big government" promoters, which means both are equally guilty of having shucked the Constitution.
I also agree with your description of people who use of the term RINO. LOLOL!!!
Thanks ever so much TQC, for your excellent essay/post!