This paper attempts to define the terms "vague" and "ambiguous" and then argues that the problem of doublespeak revolves around the deliberate use of ambiguity, not vagueness. Through several situational examples, doublespeak is defended as a sometimes useful tactic in order to stimulate and encourage open inquiry and openmindedness on the part of individual communicators. Imprecision for the purpose of allowing movement of position between polarized opponents or within a single individual is supported. (TS)