Working from within
Often I hear and see political observers make the comment, "there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties." Alas, many is the time they are correct - as an example the federal government has grown under administrations from both parties at an ever-increasing pace, to the detriment of freedom-loving Americans.
Some Americans have awoken from their political slumber to demand changes to the system. To use the old metaphor, these frogs found the heat in the cooking pot being turned up too quickly. Whether it's because their economic situations rapidly deteriorated, they were alarmed at the unprecedented intrusion of government into the private sector, or they became more informed citizens by broadening their spectrum of news and information, that simmering cauldron became too hot for them to bear and they decided not to suffer in silence anymore. Hence you have the TEA Party movement.
There has always been a "throw the bums out" mentality among Americans but the cycle waxes and wanes on a regular basis depending on the national mood and economy. 2010 promises to be a peak in the cycle if you believe the conventional wisdom. But throwing the bums out means defeating the entrenched special interests who would like nothing better to see the opposition splintered and working at cross purposes.
Democrats win because they promise their core constituency something for nothing - it's as simple as that. My purpose is to reiterate that nothing worthy in life comes for free, and there is a cost in what the Democrats promise. TEA Partiers have become well aware of that cost, which is not simply measured in dollars and cents, and that's why they are speaking out.
If you took my core beliefs (political and otherwise) and distilled them into a political philosophy, you'd likely find that I fall on the shadowy line between libertarian and conservative. My biggest problem with libertarianism is that followers tend to be pro-abortion and against the projection of American military power where necessary, while my biggest problem with conservatism tends to come when some adherents demand legislating morality. (Perhaps that seems to be a contradiction, but I can explain further through later comments.)
Yet I proudly bear the label of the Republican Party. For all of its faults (and they are numerous) they at least have a relatively decent chance of winning in 90-95% of American precincts. The problem I have with third parties - despite the fact I like having multiple choices on my ballot on Election Day - is that they rarely win. Sure, my Libertarian friends will tell me that there are a number of state and local office holders sporting the Libertarian Party label but it pales in comparison to the number representing the two major parties.
That's not to say I give the GOP carte blanche. Unfortunately the Beltway insiders who run the national party have the Bob Michel "go along to get along" strategy and when it's left up to them they more often than not put their backing behind the most moderate - or even liberal - candidate they can find. Case in point: a special election in New York's 23rd Congressional District where, according to Erick Erickson at Red State, the GOP candidate could easily be to the left of our former beloved (or reviled) Wayne Gilchrest (h/t Blue Ridge Forum.) Tell me again: how many Republican principles is Dede Scozzafava following with that record? Note that it wasn't the GOP voters in that district who had the say but the party bosses.
However, imagine the millions of TEA Partiers becoming active in their local Republican party apparatus. Admittedly, the outcome could be likened to that of herding cats but eventually the party stops picking Dede Scozzofavas and starts selecting more principled limited-government candidates to back.
But their job doesn't stop there. As it should be, the Maryland GOP has a policy of not endorsing candidates before the primary (at least publicly). Thus, if there is a contested primary between a conservative Republican and a RINO it would be up to the local party faithful to educate their fellow Republicans about the merits of the conservative candidates on their own. The better informed voters nearly always make the right choice, and, once united, they can train their guns on the REAL enemy: the entrenched special interests in Washington and the 50 state capitals who feed on the cancer that is big government.
Those in power don't normally give it up willingly or easily, though, so we also have to be prepared for a long siege-like fight with numerous ups and downs. There is a reason for the saying "united we stand" and by taking over the banner of the Republican Party - with a large apparatus already in place and available for use - the pro-freedom side can more effectively spread its message and marshal its resources in this long-term pitched battle.