Intellectualizing?

I remember reading an article a couple of years ago called How Not to Get Bamboozled. It talks about political languages, and uses of none-specific, and usually by itself meaningless (or have imprecise meaning) words. There are implication within a context for languages, and the context may imply certain meaning in a word while in fact doesn't have much substance. In that sense, I think Bush is a master at this. I think the backlash is actually against the use of imprecise and political language that by itself doesn't have specific meaning.

Although in terms of debates, its usually throwing your debate opponent into a loop and setup logical fallacy to have them walk into it. The use of political language in this context usually require almost endless qualifier and clarification. It might not be the best way to get the point across. I remember a guy that came in here and just do this endless, ENDLESS logical argument that doesn’t’t really go anywhere. Was his name Thomas or something?

Jam it back in, in the dark.