Killer Chomsky In The White House Hooka

The P. J. O'Rourke article linked below got me thinking about whether it truly would be possible for George Bush to unite the country with his inaugural address. Now having heard his speech, I don't know why his broad themes of freedom, liberty and human dignity wouldn't unite us, but I doubt they will.

So just what kind of speech would reach out to the bittermans on the left? I think to truly reach them, the President would have to dispatch with his usual manner of speaking in clear and coherent phrases and adopt the style of the linguist and icon of the left Noam Chomsky. To that end I have taken a few key portions of Bush's speech and ran them through the Institute's Chomskinator.


At this second gathering, our duties can be defined in such a way, as to impose an historical viewpoint, quite distinct in nature yet abstract from the underlying order. For a half a century, America expanded it's imperialistic hegemony, it may be then, that, this can be regarded in the global community, as a natural general principle that will subsume this case. Presumably, most of the methodological work in modern governance, cannot be arbitrary in the notion of a general convention regarding the nature of international diplomacy.

We have already seen that whole regions of the world simmer in resentment, notice incidentally, that, an important property of this resentment can be considered quite apart from this analysis, and is not to be regarded as a characteristic of the underlying order. Tyranny as we have come to know it, is considered sectionally, yet is unspecified with respect to our own complicity therein. Note that, individuals, prone to ideologies of pro-American intolerance, may remedy and, at the same time eliminate any associated supporting element. However, this assumption is not correct, since it is not subject to this selectionally introduced contextual feature.

As a consequence of the approach just outlined, there is only one force of history that can break the reign of hegemony, and is apparently determined by the scope of a complex symbol. Let us continue to suppose that, the earlier discussion of deviance is unspecified with respect to our actions in this regard. We are led by events, and once again it must be pointed out that this delimits any nondistinctness in the sense of distinct feature theory.

The survival of liberty in this world, increasingly depends on the success of liberty, nevertheless, it must be emphasized, once again that, this analysis is to be considered in the context of the definition of liberty, a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort. Conversely, we have already seen that liberty can be defined in such a way as to impose a stipulation to place constructions into these various categories.

For any transformation of liberty, which is sufficiently diversified in application, requires a descriptively adequate grammar. Let us continue to suppose the expansion of freedom, to be of any interest to a subset of liberal principles that preclude the requirement that it does not affect the structure in which we view the world.

Another consequence of the approach outlined above is that America's vital interests, and our deepest beliefs are necessary to impose an interpretation upon the actions of those, whom nevertheless are disparate in so far as the vital interests can be considered, through ordinary extraction, is not quite equivalent to a parasitic gap construction.

Summarizing then, we assume from the day of our founding, we have proclaimed that liberty, as defined by the theory of syntactic features developed earlier, with this clarification, the levels of acceptability can be considered irrelevant by the system of base rules exclusive of the intentions of governance. Across the generations, we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, yet this suggests that self-governance can be considered separately from the previous discussion of hegemony. However this assumption is not correct, since it has not been established that the method of interpretation regarding the underlying conventions reaches a level of acceptability to be considered a strong generative capacity of this assumption.


Nevertheless, it appears that I thank you, which is unspecified with respect to definition but correlates rather closely with the termination of this speech.