You know you’re on the losing end of an issue when, in order to garner “support,” you resort to the devious and deceptive gambit of redefining the common definition of terms. Leftist politicians have used this underhanded political tactic for eons, but the party of the donkey has recently taken it to new heights. It’s one thing to engage in political spin, but it’s quite another to blatantly redefine the terminology. That’s an act of pure deceitfulness.

Recently, Joe Biden and the congressional Democrats seeking to ram through a $2.3 trillion leftist spending boondoggle have dubbed it “infrastructure.” But Republicans led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have blasted the bill. “Less than 6% of this proposal goes to roads and bridges,” McConnell said. “It’s not remotely targeted toward what Americans think they are getting when politicians campaign on infrastructure. But instead of coming up with a better bill, Democrats have decided it’s the English language that has to change.”

In Washington, as well as across the country, the term “infrastructure” has long been defined as “basic physical and organizational structures and facilities” like roads and bridges.

Yet New York Democrat Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is responsible for perhaps the most absurd instance of turning the term “infrastructure” into a Democrat wax nose. She posted on social media, “Paid leave is infrastructure. Child care is infrastructure. Caregiving is infrastructure.” The statement earned much mockery and pushback along the lines of, “If everything is infrastructure then nothing is infrastructure.” Exactly.

But it’s not just the term “infrastructure” Democrats aim to redefine. Biden also claims his “infrastructure” bill enjoys “bipartisan” support, even though not a single Republican lawmaker has signed on to the clearly leftist boondoggle. Referencing the recent Not COVID Relief bill he signed, Biden stated, “Everybody said I had no bipartisan support.” That much of Biden’s statement was true — no Republican voted in favor of the bill. However, Biden then injected his disingenuous redefinition: “The overwhelming bipartisan support were Republican — registered Republican voters.” Even that is a lie, as the majority of Republican voters polled opposed the legislation.

When Biden’s dubious and novel definition of “bipartisan” was challenged, his senior advisor Anita Dunn obfuscated: “If you looked up ‘bipartisan’ in the dictionary, I think it would say support from Republicans and Democrats. It doesn’t say the Republicans have to be in Congress.”

However, Barack Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was more honest, as he bluntly observed, “What’s become crystal clear is that Biden has redefined bipartisan.” Even so, he commended Biden’s deceitfulness, arguing, “It isn’t ‘how many Republicans I’ve got.’ It’s about, ‘How many Republican voters or mayors and governors can I get to support my stuff?’ And Washington is slow to catch up to the Biden definition.”

But the reason Biden and the Democrats are playing this silly and deceptive game is because they have no interest in having to actually engage in bipartisanship, which inevitably requires compromise. So, in order to redefine “compromise,” Biden has sought to redefine “bipartisanship.” That way he can attempt to sell the false claim that his “infrastructure” bill enjoys “bipartisan” support.

Finally, let’s put things in perspective. Republican objections to the Democrats’ massive spending bills aren’t borne out of some obstructionist agenda, as Biden asserts, but over genuine concern over out-of-control spending. Combine this “infrastructure” bill with his “COVID relief” bill and Biden will have spent more in three months than was spent on both Iraq wars. With apologies to drunken sailors everywhere, he’s spending like one. And when challenged, his response is that it’s “not big enough.” He really is losing his mind.