Some people feel (or posture as though they feel they should feel) that the term RINO is offensive.
They might have a point. A case certainly could be made for needless offence against a noble and powerful beast known as the rhinoceros. Then again, the rhinoceros is regarded as having bad eyesight and prone to forcefully smash against all perceived provocateurs.

When it comes to those whom the allegedly offensive term RINO is lodged against, I can see where the poor vision comparison appears valid. It makes you wonder if they’ve read the founding documents, the party creed, and platform. Or, if they have any idea how their actions and words will be viewed by those who have.

As to the forceful smashing, I wonder. It seems it might even be backwards. The biggest damage isn’t so much to the Republican brand over-all. It’s more likely that the damage done to their OWN reputation as conservatives. Their own enduring legacy. Their own ability to be trusted with furthering the American republic, and an overall damage to a dozen other like things.

So, the comparative imagery is flawed. Yeah, I know. It’s not about the visual image per se. It’s not really about offending the sensitivities of any particular example of the rhinoceros’ species.
It’s about the assertion in the acronym. Which, given the face-palming behavior of folks like Pence, Murkowski, Flake, Romney, McCain, Kasich, (Liz) Cheney, etc., I can definitely see where the attribution of RINO comes from. But, as initially stated: Some people feel (or posture as though they feel they should feel) that the term RINO is offensive.
But I have a new solution! Let’s just come up with a NEW PERJORITIVE!

Only the privileged few that read this will be in on it. So, as the new term races across the political sphere, hardly anyone will know what it means! Meanwhile, the appropriate slam is made and the supporters of the insulted will have to do their homework to figure out that they’ve got some new thing to be offended by.
We’ll start with Aesop, then move to Thomas Nast’s cartoon of 1874. Along the way, we’ll make one alteration. Instead of an ass wearing a lion’s skin, we’ll just swap the skin in question.
Imagine a donkey wearing an elephant costume! Now, work up a phrase and extract the new acronym! Donkey Wearing Elephant Costume – DWEC.

So, the next time you hear a wheezy bray burble out of a supposed elephant’s trunk, or see some huge “AOC” style chompers raging where respectable tusks are expected; or catch sight
of a diminutive pachyderm menacingly gallop about where you expect to observe the lumbering wise gravitas of the one animal with the longest memory…, You’ll know you’re
looking at a person with a DWEC disorder.

Consider these paraphrased comments we occasionally encounter from some alleged Republicans:

“Let’s get with the times! The 2nd amendment is clearly superseded by public safety concerns”
(Insert the DWEC’s human name here)

“It isn’t really murder when a woman exerts her unique right to choose”
(Insert the DWEC’s human name here)

“Donald Trump has set the Republican Party back for untold years”
(Insert the DWEC’s human name here)

“The case has no standing. I see no proof nor reason to question the 2020 election”
(Insert the DWEC’s human name here)

“I’m ashamed by my Republican colleagues. The American people put us here to work together.”
(Insert the DWEC’s human name here)

“Critical Race Theory is not in the curriculum, so we don’t need to worry. We have to be careful about what we say or else we’ll be complicit with potential violence.”
(Insert the DWEC’s human name here)

With friends like DWECs, who needs Socialist Democrats?

Really. Why impugn and defame an amazing creature of God’s animal Kingdom; the great rhinoceros?

Forget RINO’s.
Don’t be a DWEC.

Yet, not all who should will avoid posturing and speaking like a DWEC. Categorizing a person based on thoughts and actions is divisive and upsetting to some. I find corrupting the Creed and abandoning core principles divisive and upsetting. So, which one is right?

To me, the answer is which one works in the unending effort to Keep the Republic. HA! Did I just say Keep? I’m sure I meant recover. It’s that bad.

So, what do we do about this offense problem? It’s quite simple. Assign the burden where it belongs. Each of us must manage our own reactions to things that may provoke us. This is especially true in a Republic that promotes free speech and free thought. As Jordon Peterson famously said: “In order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive.”

Lastly, timing is an important tool to be effectively “offensive”. Primaries, elections, and campaign season look good to me – at a minimum.

So, at this point, some might ask: Why does this matter? What’s the point? Do we really need another name-calling term for people with whom we don’t agree? Aren’t the socialist-democrats doing enough of this already?

The answer is: Relax. It’s a device for a newsletter article. A mere method to get thoughts going towards how critical it is to vet each and every candidate and be willing to make changes, however upsetting, when they won’t stand, act, and represent as the real elephants we hoped and assumed they were.