No argument with your qualified restatement, except -
*UNLESS* such a 'mind experiment' (the least loaded connotation one might assign?) IS expressed in terms very close to yours:
It indeed leaves open all those inferences - and any speaker who does not know this: is asking for the result he is apt to achieve. And a person with as many didactic remarks within his public record (and in a little book on ~ how You should live) - needs to be even more astute. After all - he lives for/within Public pronouncements.
Not everyone speaks as carefully as do you: like, maybe 94.7% don't?
Bennett is speaking from no vacuum; we bloody well Will take any speech from him - in context of previous speech, especially that which invites innuendo. And from his homilies (and how he does or does not practice what he feels he just must preach.)
[link|http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0306.green.html| Speaking of hypocrisy..] or maybe just the overhead of preaching (?)
