RINO and DINO sounds like some sort of cartoon or maybe even a NY nightclub act from the ’50s, but in this case it means "Republican in Name Only" and "Democrat in Name Only."  These terms are bandied about online, usually as an epithet in some political nutjob’s rantings.  You know the kind: "Bush is God, the Republicans are the only thing standing between America and the Democrats’ bankrupting us with their irresponsible tax and spend policies and the liberals’ bringing about Armageddon with their support of baby butchering and butt humping", or, "Bush is the Devil, the Democrats are the only thing standing between America and the Republicans’ bankrupting us with their irresponsible tax-cut and spend policies and the neo-cons bringing about Armageddon with their foolhardy battle with Islam."  Basically I’m talking about the pains-in-the-asses who see all human relations as adversarial and somehow never picked up the finer points of civil discourse during their adolescent development.

I’m always amused by the RINO and DINO accusations.  As someone who’s never joined either party I can’t be called anything but NINO (nothing in name only) and since that doesn’t actually mean anything it doesn’t really sting.  My brother used to accuse me of being an independent because I didn’t have the balls to take a stand on issues.  I used to respond that I refused to be associated with any group that I could disagree with consistently since I didn’t want anyone to think that I might believe in something in which I didn’t.  I think I also said something nasty like he was a Republican because he couldn’t think for himself, but hey, we were young.

I truly have a hard time understanding why an "average voter" would join a political party.  It’s easy to understand why people who want to be in power would form or join a party since it’s a means for them to achieve their goals, but I just don’t get it for the average person.  Maybe they want to be told how to think, or maybe they look at it like supporting a football team, or maybe they like the snacks at the party meetings, but it’s still a befuddler to me. I mean if I were to declare myself a Democrat I’d be associated with people like Kennedy and Rangel, and if I were to declare myself a Republican I’d be associated with people like Foxx and Bush.

And what about the issues?  You ask any 10 Republicans what they believe about the war and you’re going to get a lot of different answers.  Some want to get out, some want to stay.  Ask them about the separation of church and state and you’ll get different answers depending on whether you’re speaking to a fiscal or social conservative.  If I were Republican I’d be spending all my time prefacing my remarks with, "I’m a Republican, but not one of those Republicans, because I don’t agree with their stance on…", and it would take me a full paragraph before I could actually state my own beliefs.  As an independent I simply start with, "I don’t belong to a party.  I believe…"  I’m not picking on the Republicans since the same would happen with the Democrats.

All this got me to thinking that maybe the solution is to start a party of NINOs.  We’d essentially be a party that professes a belief in nothing, requires its members to only vote their consciences and endorses no particular candidate or issue.  We’d have a big convention just like the other parties, and we might even nominate a candidate, but we’d do it by lottery.  Hell, our odds would be fantastic for putting someone better in the White House than the Democrats or Republicans, I mean even random selection could do better than those jokers have done for the last generation or so.  We could even give ourselves a nice all-encompassing name: The Elephant’s Ass.  Our slogan could be something pithy like, "All for nothing".  I wonder if the RINOs and DINOs would come over if we invited them?