If the New York Post had to name three things that it can't stand, those things would be: cultural sensitivity, wisdom, and peace (fourth: stepping on gum). That's why the paper is outraged that "the Bush administration has gone all PC in the War on Terror." They've stopped using words like "jihad" and "Islamo-fascism" because they may be provocative or offensive. The Post's jaw literally dropped onto the floor at that news! Right onto the floor! So the neocon, Murdoch-owned scandal sheet had to evoke the memory of prominent socialist revolutionary George Orwell to help it call for harsher language about the Arabian menace:

What's really going on here, according to Andrew McCarthy of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, is an attempt to soft-pedal the reality of jihad by downplaying its connection to holy war and instead stressing its "broader" meaning of a struggle to do good.

"Government is heavily influenced by the media and the commentariat," McCarthy rightly notes, and those interests "are trying to redefine the troubling concept of jihad as a positive."

It would have made George Orwell laugh - or cry.

The Post feels that using the term "violent extremists" instead of "Jihadists" is too soft on terrorism. Tomorrow, they can suggest we should just go straight back to "Ragheads."

Send an email to Hamilton Nolan, the author of this post, at Hamilton@gawker.com.