“Language is the armory of the human mind, and at once contains the trophies of its past and the weapons of its future conquests”
~Samuel Taylor Coleridge
"It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is…”
~President Bill Clinton
Ambiguity, a lack of clarity that can lead to confusion and misunderstanding, is one of the keys to the advancement of the Left’s agenda. The less clear things are, the more they can be twisted to the advantage of those with the willingness to do so. The brevity and simplicity which characterize the Constitution demonstrate that this fact was not lost on the Founders:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
That is Amendment I to the Constitution in its entirety. It is a great example of how things were done prior to the infestation of modern–day progressivism. Whether or not you agree with the Founders’ decision to incorporate the Bill of Rights with the Constitution, hopefully you would agree that the authors attempted to make this governing document clear, concise and unambiguous; although certainly they knew, even in their day, that there is no stipulation so clear that it cannot eventually be trespassed upon by determined liberals.
The original Constitution, when viewed in modern format, is about ten pages long, about seventeen if you add in all of the amendments that have been added since the founding of the country. This was the document, years in the making, which laid the foundation of government for the United States of America. In seventeen pages! By contrast, the monument to progressivism more commonly known as Obamacare is about 2,000 pages long. But don’t worry. I’m sure there’s nothing ambiguous or unclear in it that might lead to the further erosion of our freedoms.
Lately, we’ve been hearing a lot about sexual harassment. In defining what this now means, the standard seems to center around the notion of “unwanted sexual advances.” Talk about ambiguity! This is like a parent refusing to tell a child what time his curfew is until after he gets home. One cannot help but suspect that the intent was to leave men exposed to charges that can be highly subjective, while giving women an undue advantage in extracting a pay off. No doubt the liberal feminists who aggressively sought to define and shape today’s policies on sexual harassment never had any intention of applying it to liberal males like Bill Clinton.
One self-described leftist blogger whom I argue with from time to time often campaigns for the “living wage,” a progressive dream that represents the epitome of ambiguity. I have attempted to make him see the foolishness of such a proposal, just from a practical standpoint, by asking, “What kind of ‘living’ must a wage provide”? Should it be sufficient for one person or for a family of ten? A basement apartment in a low-rent neighborhood or a four-bedroom home in the burbs? Bugtussle or Manhattan? Macaroni and cheese for dinner, or steak? A subway ticket or a car? Must it provide for luxuries like cell phones, TVs, cable, and computers? The average 10-year old can see the problem inherit in attempting to institute something like the “living wage,” while the average liberal cannot or will not. This is what makes him a menace to society.
I sometimes hear people quip that we are on the verge of a civil war between Left and Right, but in my mind there is no question that liberals have been at war for the soul of this nation for quite a long time. They simply manipulate language into weapons instead using of guns, and this verbal form of guerilla warfare has enabled them to advance their agenda right under our noses.