I had nothing to do with death panels. I thought it was a horrible phrase about end of life. I didn't think it was accurate, and I was - I've always been opposed to it. The reason why I stood behind that phrase "death tax" for so many years is because the only time that you could pay that tax, the only time, is on the death of a relative. And that's what makes it a death tax. You have to be accurate.

It's something that people who read my materials have asked me in the past. If you don't have principles - the last chapter of the book ["Win"] is all about winning with principles. It's all about applying words to good things, good people, good efforts. Without that inherent accuracy, then even the best words will still fail.

Some people call it global warming; some people call it climate change. What is the difference?

What the people now respond - and the goal of those ads is to merely get the name of the medication into the minds of the consumers so that they will ask their doctor about it. That's the whole goal.

Bill Clinton was effective because he had that personal relationship, that this was a guy who had tremendous curiosity, which is another one of the key attributes. And he had the ability - his mind was - his mind and his heart were very well-connected. And so he genuinely empathized.

George W. Bush - who I'm sure that a lot of people, when I say this, will not be happy about it - but Bush had a determination, and had a very clearly defined set of principles. You knew exactly where he stood.

People want to be inspired. They want to aspire to something. ... You can have the best product, the best service, the best argument in a debate. But without the effective words you still lose. In the end you need good principles and good language if you are to succeed.