One of the highlights of last year's Restoration Weekend was, after Representative Peter Hoekstra had used the term "radical jihad" several times in his talk, a questioner rose to ask, "Representative Hoekstra, is there any form of jihad that would be acceptable?" He answered that since the goal of jihad was conversion, death, enslavement or dhimmitude, no, indeed, there was no acceptable version of jihad. A press release:

Washington, May 7 - U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., the top Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, today successfully led an effort to strip all earmarks from the FY’09 Intelligence Authorization bill...

Hoekstra also sponsored an amendment, rejected by committee Democrats, that would prohibit the intelligence community from adopting speech codes that encumber accurately describing the radical jihadist terrorists that attacked America and continue to threaten the homeland.

“Trying to impose speech codes on how to describe our enemy smacks of McCarthyism in reverse,” Hoekstra said. “Al-Qaeda knows point blank that they want to kill Americans. How sad is it that as we approach the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, we are still debating how to define our enemy?"

*There Ain't No Good Chain Gang neither.