NewsMax reports that Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee have banned the use of the phrase “global war on terror” in the 2008 defense budget.

As a phrase, I never did like “war on terror.” Like wars on drugs, poverty, crime, etc., such phrases do not properly identify a target and do not define a condition of victory. When one declares war on a country, fighting continues until that country surrenders or is obliterated. How is one to know whether a war on “terror” is won?

The Republicans may be a little scorned at this move, but if I were them, I would use this opportunity to restate to the American people the clearly defined missions of our military. Let the American people know that we do not plan to be in a perpetual state of emergency and loss of fundamental liberties. Let Congress declare war on Shiite and Sunni insurgents in Iraq and execute that war to its completion.

The government, no matter how big, cannot protect us from every little hazard and terrorist act that can happen to us. It cannot collect, process, and wisely use that amount of information, no matter how much technology progresses. Passing to the federal government one’s local responsibility to keep facilities secure is an invitation for the federal government to fail against unreasonable expectations, no matter if the administration is Republican or Democratic.

Obviously, this removal of text is another symbolic rebuke to the President, where it is more important to score points by tearing people down rather than building principles up. The House is divided against itself. The founding fathers warned us in the Federalist papers about faction. We’ve got it, and our enemies are more than happy about it.