“Never underestimate the cost of inaction”.  link

Consider:

  • Colin Powell opposed the invasion of IRAQ.
  • He was one of the only decision-makers “in the room” to have served his country in a war.
  • He was dismissed/fired for publicly questioning his administration’s bellicose attitude.

So where is the problem?

His line (well, more of a principle than an actual line) has been used extensively and taken out of context, sometimes to support the very things he opposed.  Yet his name still gets mentioned every time.

Bottom line:
A brilliant and insightful line needs a clear message and a committed messenger to support it. This is the only way to make sure that what was SAID, what was HEARD and what was UNDERSTOOD are, in fact, the same.

Otherwise, who knows how your line will be repeated and interpreted…