You have to steer a course between not appalling people, but at the same time not misleading them.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
When people blanket a whole class of people with statements, I just think that is unfair to everybody. I could do the same thing about media. I can do the same thing about politicians or lawyers, and they're just never accurate.
You have to lead people gently toward what they already know is right.
You should never appease terrorists. The mistake made by critics of the 'talking to your enemy' approach is to equate talking with appeasing.
I think that if your approach is one where you don't want to alienate anybody, you're going to have to soften the viewpoint or the information that you're offering to such an extent that it doesn't have the power to make any difference. You have to take that risk.
The problem with merely writing so that you can be understood is that the wrong people, in advancing their agendas, are only too ready to misunderstand you. Writing so that you cannot be misunderstood anticipates and preempts those who would willfully distort what you are trying to say.
I was wrong to exaggerate in statements related to my experiences in the White House and the Royal Family. I am truly sorry for misleading people and misstating the facts.
One must not attempt to justify them, but rather to sense their nature simply and clearly.
You will find in politics that you are much exposed to the attribution of false motive. Never complain and never explain.
If you destroy the credibility of those people or institutions that could undermine your own, you create an opportunity for your voice, however irresponsible or misleading it may be, to gain traction.
Telling the truth to people who misunderstand you is generally promoting a falsehood, isn't it?