The change of definitions continues...

Under President GW Bush, the libs, the Dems, and the media have felt it desirable to change definitions...

The current row over warrentless NSA wiretapping of foreign suspects talking to individuals within the United States was defined by liberals/democrats/media as acceptable on February 9th, 1995 when Clinton okayed similar measures. On may 23rd, 1979 Jimmy Carter likewise approved wiretapping without court orders. Keep in mind that under Clinton and carter we weren't even CLOSE to being in the state of war that we are in now.

But there is a long history of the libtards changing definitions in the last 7 years......

The outing of Valerie Plame is defined as a scandal by liberals who didn't bat an eye when Craig Livingstone and Anthony Marceca collected OVER 1000 confidential FBI Files in 1993 and 1994. Furthermore they are noticeably silent in not defining who "outed" the supposed Eastern European CIA prisons and the "outing" of confidential wiretaps mentioned above as equally scandalous.

What was once defined as a "success" is no longer recognized as such. Once apon a time, someone with a Rhodes Scholarship was defined as "wise" and "intelligent".... surpass that with a MASTERS DEGREE in business, and suddenly educational accomplishment means nothing.

Democrats define Bosnia as a "success" even though Milosovic's trial is still a quagmire of delays, incompetence, and blundering that would be considered too unrealistic for a plot in a Keystone Kops Movie. The Baltics are little better off now than during Operation Joint Endeavour. Certainly the Bosnians haven't created a new Democracy for themselves, a new constitution, a new parliament... but THAT is somehow defined a "success."

Liberals want to define the union of 2 men, 2 women, 1 man and 3 women or 5 men and two women as a "marriage" even though the definition of marriage has always been the union of one man and one woman.

If Bill Clinton had been responsible for unemployment in an allied country dropping from 60% to 28% in 3 years, as it has in Iraq, it would be defined a "success."

If Bill Clinton had the balls to effect the Iraqi regime change he signed as national policy back in 1998, the media would have defined the action as a "successful completion of resolved national policy." When GW Bush did it, they defined it as "preemptive"

If Enron, Adelphia, Arthur Andersen, HealthSouth, WorldCom, and Tyco had been pursued by Janet Reno in the '90's AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN, Clinton would have been praised as a President bringing low the high and mighty "big business." Again, it would have been defined as a "success of the Administration." When GW Bush's DOJ does it, it doesn't warrant attention.

After ignoring George Bush Sr.'s war record and Bob Dole's war sacrifices, not to mention supporting a draft dodger.... suddenly in 2004 "WAR HERO" became a definition of someone worthy of high office.

Adolph Hitler, George Orwell, and Aldus Huxley all recognized in one way or another a fundamental truth that your typical Libtard refuses to recognize and the Democrat leaders exploit better than Goebbels could ever dream of....

HE WHO CONTROLS THE LANGUAGE CAN CONTROL THE MINDS OF THE WEAK!