Unfortunately, this is interesting in that it is pretty much the sort of response discussions of Chomsky invariably provoke. Everything The Master has said must be treasured and carefully dealt with and woe unto anyone who dare sum what He has to say in Mere Wordes. And since It is ever so Simple, Not Understanding, or making unorthodox statements, is evidence of Stupidity...or evil intent. It's pretty remarkable that the Chomp's defenders behave in this way... it's so...Leninist.
Andie is spot on for Chomsky's theoretical framework...you know, the one he keeps saying he doesn't have so you have to accept it as common sense. It's probably harder for us since we basically all agree that it is common sense, but I think people ought to be far more attuned to Chomsky's rather exceptional talents as a rhetorician... I see no convincing reason to buy his austere epistemology together with his very realistic political commentary. You loose a lot if you buy Chomp in bulk - Foucault, for instance.
As for the 'use small words' advice - that's pretty sensible, up to the point your newspaper starts sounding like the local ISO rag: so full of angry baby talk, it's unintentionally funny.
Thiago