Monday, January 16, 2012
Isaac's first Christmas!
Isaac is 8 mos! At this age, he really needed a hair cut so Isaac got his first haircut, met with Santa again at Whole Foods Market and we stayed home for the holidays! We celebrated Christmas eve with grandma and friends, went to church on Christmas day and celebrated the birth of JC. Of course, Isaac received presents. But Christmas is for kids as much at as it is a time to celebrate our kings birth. :)
Isaac meets santa at wf
We invited some friends over to put up the Christmas tree
At 7 Mos, Isaac meets Santa and flies to HI
My fav pictures of Isaac at seven month, Nov. 2011
Isaac met Santa on 11-12-11 at Cherry Creek; and waited in line an hour to sit with him.
Here is Isaac on the East shore of Kauai, HI enjoy the beach, the water, and eating the sand.
On the way up to Hanalei, we stopped to view the valley.
Here is Isaac and dad by a historic lighthouse in Hawaii
On Thanksgiving, we dressed up and went out for dinner at the the resort restaurant overlooking the ocean.
Sunrise over Kauai
here is a tender moment with dad
Here is Isaac playing in the sand with Grandma, uncle Rick and Dad
Waterfall on the West Shore, on Kauai
Friday, October 7, 2011
From Birth to three month...
Just before Isaac was born, I looked like this.
On the day of Isaac's birth, I was exhausted and tired. Isaac was born that evening.
Isaac one month later.
Isaac at two month.
Isaac at three month, and teething...
My stuffed potato 6 month old baby
Isaac is quite the chuncky monkey. He received a nickname from a friend: papita rellena.
It seems unreal that only 6 month ago, I gave birth to the cutest baby boy! Where'd all this time go? Since giving birth, we moved, had a baptism, and put our condo for sale. Wow! Now Isaac isn't so itty bitty. He likes to try food and babbles all day long. And mommy is back to her weight again! Yay!
Not to mention, Isaac got to expeirnce the Hot Springs in Idaho Springs this past weekend. He loves the water and the warmth of the hot spring was really soothing. So much so that... it tired him out. Isaac was out cold.
But it was a fun weekend.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
City of Commerce City v. State, 40 P.3d 1273
PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals Pursuant to C.A.R. 50, 01CA144. District Court, City and County of Denver. Case No. 98CV1098. Honorable Paul A. Markson, Jr., Judge.
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
CASE SUMMARYPROCEDURAL POSTURE: Petitioners home-rule municipalities challenged whether certain provisions of Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 42-4-110.5 and 42-3-112(14) (2001) regulating the use of automated vehicle identification systems (AVIS), popularly known as photo radar and photo red light, unconstitutionally infringed on their powers under Colo. Const. art. XX, §6. The trial court upheld the constitutionality of the provisions. The municipalities appealed by writ of certiorari.
OVERVIEW: Affirming the trial court, the supreme court held that the regulation of AVIS to enforce traffic laws was a matter of mixed local and state concern, and it held that the challenged provisions of §§ 42-4-110.5 and 42-3-112(14) were not superseded by the cities' local ordinances or charters. The constitutionality of the challenged provisions were upheld. Without uniform state legislation, drivers might have been subject to a significant variety of conflicting local legislation, further increasing the potential for confusion and substantially affecting their expectations. Important to the supreme court's uniformity analysis was the fact that cities wishing to ticket traffic violators using automated systems must access those drivers' names and addresses through the state motor vehicle registration office. Thus, a certain level of cooperation between a city and the state was necessary to make the system work. The need for cooperation between cities and the state was an important factor in the supreme court's analysis. Thus, the regulation of automated vehicle identification systems affected the residents of the state as a whole, as opposed to simply affecting local residents.
OUTCOME: The judgment of the trial court was affirmed.
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
CASE SUMMARYPROCEDURAL POSTURE: Petitioners home-rule municipalities challenged whether certain provisions of Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 42-4-110.5 and 42-3-112(14) (2001) regulating the use of automated vehicle identification systems (AVIS), popularly known as photo radar and photo red light, unconstitutionally infringed on their powers under Colo. Const. art. XX, §6. The trial court upheld the constitutionality of the provisions. The municipalities appealed by writ of certiorari.
OVERVIEW: Affirming the trial court, the supreme court held that the regulation of AVIS to enforce traffic laws was a matter of mixed local and state concern, and it held that the challenged provisions of §§ 42-4-110.5 and 42-3-112(14) were not superseded by the cities' local ordinances or charters. The constitutionality of the challenged provisions were upheld. Without uniform state legislation, drivers might have been subject to a significant variety of conflicting local legislation, further increasing the potential for confusion and substantially affecting their expectations. Important to the supreme court's uniformity analysis was the fact that cities wishing to ticket traffic violators using automated systems must access those drivers' names and addresses through the state motor vehicle registration office. Thus, a certain level of cooperation between a city and the state was necessary to make the system work. The need for cooperation between cities and the state was an important factor in the supreme court's analysis. Thus, the regulation of automated vehicle identification systems affected the residents of the state as a whole, as opposed to simply affecting local residents.
OUTCOME: The judgment of the trial court was affirmed.
42-4-110.5. Automated vehicle identification systems
C.R.S. 42-4-110.5 (2011)
(1) The general assembly hereby finds and declares that the enforcement of traffic laws through the use of automated vehicle identification systems under this section is a matter of statewide concern and is an area in which uniform state standards are necessary.
(1.5) Except for the authorization contained in subsection (1.7) of this section, nothing in this section shall apply to a violation detected by an automated vehicle identification device for driving twenty-five miles per hour or more in excess of the reasonable and prudent speed or twenty-five miles per hour or more in excess of the maximum speed limit of seventy-five miles per hour detected by the use of an automated vehicle identification device.
(1.7) (a) Upon request from the department of transportation, the department of public safety shall utilize an automated vehicle identification system to detect speeding violations under part 11 of this article within a highway maintenance, repair, or construction zone designated pursuant to section 42-4-614 (1) (a), if the department of public safety complies with subsections (2) to (6) of this section. An automated vehicle identification system shall not be used under this subsection (1.7) unless maintenance, repair, or construction is occurring at the time the system is being used. The department of public safety may contract with a vendor to implement this subsection (1.7). If the department of public safety contracts with a vendor, the contract shall incorporate the processing elements specified by the department of public safety. The department of public safety may contract with the vendor to notify violators, collect and remit the penalties and surcharges to the state treasury less the vendor's expenses, reconcile payments against outstanding violations, implement collection efforts, and notify the department of public safety of unpaid violations for possible referral to the judicial system. No penalty assessment or summons and complaint or a penalty or surcharge for a violation detected by an automated vehicle identification system under this subsection (1.7) shall be forwarded to the department for processing.
(b) The department of transportation shall reimburse the department of public safety for the direct and indirect costs of complying with this subsection (1.7).
(2) A municipality may adopt an ordinance authorizing the use of an automated vehicle identification system to detect violations of traffic regulations adopted by the municipality, or the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may utilize an automated vehicle identification system to detect traffic violations under state law, subject to the following conditions and limitations:
(a) (I) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2002, p. 570, § 1, effective May 24, 2002.)
(II) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality detects any alleged violation of a municipal traffic regulation or a traffic violation under state law through the use of an automated vehicle identification system, then the state, county, city and county, or municipality shall serve the penalty assessment notice or summons and complaint for the alleged violation on the defendant no later than ninety days after the alleged violation occurred. If a penalty assessment notice or summons and complaint for a violation detected using an automated vehicle identification system is personally served, the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may only charge the actual costs of service of process that shall be no more than the amount usually charged for civil service of process.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of the statutes to the contrary, the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may not report to the department any conviction or entry of judgment against a defendant for violation of a municipal traffic regulation or a traffic violation under state law if the violation was detected through the use of an automated vehicle identification system.
(c) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may not report to the department any outstanding judgment or warrant for purposes of section 42-2-107 (5) or 42-2-118 (3) based upon any violation or alleged violation of a municipal traffic regulation or traffic violation under state law detected through the use of an automated vehicle identification system.
(d) (I) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may not use an automated vehicle identification system to detect a violation of part 11 of this article or a local speed ordinance unless there is posted an appropriate temporary sign in a conspicuous place not fewer than three hundred feet before the area in which the automated vehicle identification device is to be used notifying the public that an automated vehicle identification device is in use immediately ahead. The requirement of this subparagraph (I) shall not be deemed satisfied by the posting of a permanent sign or signs at the borders of a county, city and county, or municipality, nor by the posting of a permanent sign in an area in which an automated vehicle identification device is to be used, but this subparagraph (I) shall not be deemed a prohibition against the posting of such permanent signs.
(II) Except as provided in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (d), an automated vehicle identification system designed to detect disobedience to a traffic control signal or another violation of this article or a local traffic ordinance shall not be used unless the state, county, city and county, or municipality using such system conspicuously posts a sign notifying the public that an automated vehicle identification device is in use immediately ahead. The sign shall:
(A) Be placed in a conspicuous place not fewer than two hundred feet nor more than five hundred feet before the automated vehicle identification system; and
(B) Use lettering that is at least four inches high for upper case letters and two and nine-tenths inches high for lower case letters.
(e) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may not require a registered owner of a vehicle to disclose the identity of a driver of the vehicle who is detected through the use of an automated vehicle identification system. However, the registered owner may be required to submit evidence that the owner was not the driver at the time of the alleged violation.
(f) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality shall not issue a penalty assessment notice or summons for a violation detected using an automated vehicle identification system unless, at the time the violation is alleged to have occurred, an officer or employee of the state, the county, the city and county, or the municipality is present during the operation of the automated vehicle identification device; except that this paragraph (f) shall not apply to an automated vehicle identification system designed to detect violations for disobedience to a traffic control signal.
(g) (I) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality shall not issue a penalty assessment notice or summons for a violation detected using an automated vehicle identification system unless the violation occurred within a school zone, as defined in section 42-4-615; within a residential neighborhood; within a maintenance, construction, or repair zone designated pursuant to section 42-4-614; or along a street that borders a municipal park.
(II) For purposes of this paragraph (g), unless the context otherwise requires, "residential neighborhood" means any block on which a majority of the improvements along both sides of the street are residential dwellings and the speed limit is thirty-five miles per hour or less.
(III) This paragraph (g) shall not apply to an automated vehicle identification system designed to detect disobedience to a traffic control signal.
(3) The department has no authority to assess any points against a license under section 42-2-127 upon entry of a conviction or judgment for a violation of a municipal traffic regulation or a traffic violation under state law if the violation was detected through the use of an automated vehicle identification system. The department may not keep any record of such violation in the official records maintained by the department under section 42-2-121.
(4) (a) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality detects a speeding violation of less than ten miles per hour over the reasonable and prudent speed under a municipal traffic regulation or under state law through the use of an automated vehicle identification system and the violation is the first violation by such driver that the state, county, city and county, or municipality has detected using an automated vehicle identification system, then the state, county, city and county, or municipality shall mail such driver a warning regarding the violation and the state, county, city and county, or municipality may not impose any penalty or surcharge for such first violation.
(b) (I) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality detects a second or subsequent speeding violation under a municipal traffic regulation or under state law by a driver, or a first such violation by the driver if the provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection (4) do not apply, through the use of an automated vehicle identification system, then, except as may be permitted in subparagraph (II) of this paragraph (b), the maximum penalty that the state, county, city and county, or municipality may impose for such violation, including any surcharge, is forty dollars.
(II) If any violation described in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (b) occurs within a school zone, as defined in section 42-4-615, the maximum penalty that may be imposed shall be doubled.
(III) Subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (b) shall not apply within a maintenance, construction, or repair zone designated pursuant to section 42-4-614.
(4.5) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality detects a violation under a municipal traffic regulation or under state law for disobedience to a traffic control signal through the use of an automated vehicle identification system, the maximum penalty that the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may impose for such violation, including any surcharge, is seventy-five dollars.
(4.7) If a driver fails to pay a penalty imposed for a violation detected using an automated vehicle identification device, the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality shall not attempt to enforce such a penalty by immobilizing the driver's vehicle.
(5) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality has established an automated vehicle identification system for the enforcement of municipal traffic regulations or state traffic laws, then no portion of any fine collected through the use of such system may be paid to the manufacturer or vendor of the automated vehicle identification system equipment. The compensation paid by the state, county, city and county, or municipality for such equipment shall be based upon the value of such equipment and may not be based upon the number of traffic citations issued or the revenue generated by such equipment.
(6) As used in this section, the term "automated vehicle identification system" means a system whereby:
(a) A machine is used to automatically detect a violation of a traffic regulation and simultaneously record a photograph of the vehicle, the operator of the vehicle, and the license plate of the vehicle; and
(b) A penalty assessment notice or summons and complaint is issued to the registered owner of the motor vehicle.
HISTORY: Source:. L. 97: Entire section added, p. 1667, § 1, effective June 5.L. 99: (1.5) and (4.5) added and (2), (4), and (5) amended, p. 612, § 1, effective May 17.L. 2002: (2)(a), (2)(d), and (4.5) amended and (2)(f), (2)(g), and (4.7) added, pp. 570, 572, § § 1, 2, effective May 24.L. 2004: (2)(d) amended, p. 351, § 1, effective August 4.L. 2008: (1.5) and (2)(g)(I) amended and (1.7) and (4)(b)(III) added, pp. 2080, 2081, § § 4, 5, effective June 3.L. 2009: (2)(d) amended, (SB 09-222), ch. 150, p. 629, § 1, effective August 5.
Cross references: Section 1 of chapter 412, Session Laws of Colorado 2008, provides that the act amending subsections (1.5) and (2)(g)(I) and enacting subsections (1.7) and (4)(b)(III) shall be known and may be cited as the "Charles Mather Highway Safety Act".
ANNOTATION
This section supersedes conflicting provisions of municipal ordinances. Regulation of automated vehicle identification systems to enforce traffic laws is a matter of mixed local and state concern. In the event of conflict, state law prevails. City of Commerce City v. State, 40 P.3d 1273 (Colo. 2002).
(1) The general assembly hereby finds and declares that the enforcement of traffic laws through the use of automated vehicle identification systems under this section is a matter of statewide concern and is an area in which uniform state standards are necessary.
(1.5) Except for the authorization contained in subsection (1.7) of this section, nothing in this section shall apply to a violation detected by an automated vehicle identification device for driving twenty-five miles per hour or more in excess of the reasonable and prudent speed or twenty-five miles per hour or more in excess of the maximum speed limit of seventy-five miles per hour detected by the use of an automated vehicle identification device.
(1.7) (a) Upon request from the department of transportation, the department of public safety shall utilize an automated vehicle identification system to detect speeding violations under part 11 of this article within a highway maintenance, repair, or construction zone designated pursuant to section 42-4-614 (1) (a), if the department of public safety complies with subsections (2) to (6) of this section. An automated vehicle identification system shall not be used under this subsection (1.7) unless maintenance, repair, or construction is occurring at the time the system is being used. The department of public safety may contract with a vendor to implement this subsection (1.7). If the department of public safety contracts with a vendor, the contract shall incorporate the processing elements specified by the department of public safety. The department of public safety may contract with the vendor to notify violators, collect and remit the penalties and surcharges to the state treasury less the vendor's expenses, reconcile payments against outstanding violations, implement collection efforts, and notify the department of public safety of unpaid violations for possible referral to the judicial system. No penalty assessment or summons and complaint or a penalty or surcharge for a violation detected by an automated vehicle identification system under this subsection (1.7) shall be forwarded to the department for processing.
(b) The department of transportation shall reimburse the department of public safety for the direct and indirect costs of complying with this subsection (1.7).
(2) A municipality may adopt an ordinance authorizing the use of an automated vehicle identification system to detect violations of traffic regulations adopted by the municipality, or the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may utilize an automated vehicle identification system to detect traffic violations under state law, subject to the following conditions and limitations:
(a) (I) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2002, p. 570, § 1, effective May 24, 2002.)
(II) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality detects any alleged violation of a municipal traffic regulation or a traffic violation under state law through the use of an automated vehicle identification system, then the state, county, city and county, or municipality shall serve the penalty assessment notice or summons and complaint for the alleged violation on the defendant no later than ninety days after the alleged violation occurred. If a penalty assessment notice or summons and complaint for a violation detected using an automated vehicle identification system is personally served, the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may only charge the actual costs of service of process that shall be no more than the amount usually charged for civil service of process.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of the statutes to the contrary, the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may not report to the department any conviction or entry of judgment against a defendant for violation of a municipal traffic regulation or a traffic violation under state law if the violation was detected through the use of an automated vehicle identification system.
(c) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may not report to the department any outstanding judgment or warrant for purposes of section 42-2-107 (5) or 42-2-118 (3) based upon any violation or alleged violation of a municipal traffic regulation or traffic violation under state law detected through the use of an automated vehicle identification system.
(d) (I) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may not use an automated vehicle identification system to detect a violation of part 11 of this article or a local speed ordinance unless there is posted an appropriate temporary sign in a conspicuous place not fewer than three hundred feet before the area in which the automated vehicle identification device is to be used notifying the public that an automated vehicle identification device is in use immediately ahead. The requirement of this subparagraph (I) shall not be deemed satisfied by the posting of a permanent sign or signs at the borders of a county, city and county, or municipality, nor by the posting of a permanent sign in an area in which an automated vehicle identification device is to be used, but this subparagraph (I) shall not be deemed a prohibition against the posting of such permanent signs.
(II) Except as provided in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (d), an automated vehicle identification system designed to detect disobedience to a traffic control signal or another violation of this article or a local traffic ordinance shall not be used unless the state, county, city and county, or municipality using such system conspicuously posts a sign notifying the public that an automated vehicle identification device is in use immediately ahead. The sign shall:
(A) Be placed in a conspicuous place not fewer than two hundred feet nor more than five hundred feet before the automated vehicle identification system; and
(B) Use lettering that is at least four inches high for upper case letters and two and nine-tenths inches high for lower case letters.
(e) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may not require a registered owner of a vehicle to disclose the identity of a driver of the vehicle who is detected through the use of an automated vehicle identification system. However, the registered owner may be required to submit evidence that the owner was not the driver at the time of the alleged violation.
(f) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality shall not issue a penalty assessment notice or summons for a violation detected using an automated vehicle identification system unless, at the time the violation is alleged to have occurred, an officer or employee of the state, the county, the city and county, or the municipality is present during the operation of the automated vehicle identification device; except that this paragraph (f) shall not apply to an automated vehicle identification system designed to detect violations for disobedience to a traffic control signal.
(g) (I) The state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality shall not issue a penalty assessment notice or summons for a violation detected using an automated vehicle identification system unless the violation occurred within a school zone, as defined in section 42-4-615; within a residential neighborhood; within a maintenance, construction, or repair zone designated pursuant to section 42-4-614; or along a street that borders a municipal park.
(II) For purposes of this paragraph (g), unless the context otherwise requires, "residential neighborhood" means any block on which a majority of the improvements along both sides of the street are residential dwellings and the speed limit is thirty-five miles per hour or less.
(III) This paragraph (g) shall not apply to an automated vehicle identification system designed to detect disobedience to a traffic control signal.
(3) The department has no authority to assess any points against a license under section 42-2-127 upon entry of a conviction or judgment for a violation of a municipal traffic regulation or a traffic violation under state law if the violation was detected through the use of an automated vehicle identification system. The department may not keep any record of such violation in the official records maintained by the department under section 42-2-121.
(4) (a) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality detects a speeding violation of less than ten miles per hour over the reasonable and prudent speed under a municipal traffic regulation or under state law through the use of an automated vehicle identification system and the violation is the first violation by such driver that the state, county, city and county, or municipality has detected using an automated vehicle identification system, then the state, county, city and county, or municipality shall mail such driver a warning regarding the violation and the state, county, city and county, or municipality may not impose any penalty or surcharge for such first violation.
(b) (I) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality detects a second or subsequent speeding violation under a municipal traffic regulation or under state law by a driver, or a first such violation by the driver if the provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection (4) do not apply, through the use of an automated vehicle identification system, then, except as may be permitted in subparagraph (II) of this paragraph (b), the maximum penalty that the state, county, city and county, or municipality may impose for such violation, including any surcharge, is forty dollars.
(II) If any violation described in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (b) occurs within a school zone, as defined in section 42-4-615, the maximum penalty that may be imposed shall be doubled.
(III) Subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (b) shall not apply within a maintenance, construction, or repair zone designated pursuant to section 42-4-614.
(4.5) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality detects a violation under a municipal traffic regulation or under state law for disobedience to a traffic control signal through the use of an automated vehicle identification system, the maximum penalty that the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality may impose for such violation, including any surcharge, is seventy-five dollars.
(4.7) If a driver fails to pay a penalty imposed for a violation detected using an automated vehicle identification device, the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality shall not attempt to enforce such a penalty by immobilizing the driver's vehicle.
(5) If the state, a county, a city and county, or a municipality has established an automated vehicle identification system for the enforcement of municipal traffic regulations or state traffic laws, then no portion of any fine collected through the use of such system may be paid to the manufacturer or vendor of the automated vehicle identification system equipment. The compensation paid by the state, county, city and county, or municipality for such equipment shall be based upon the value of such equipment and may not be based upon the number of traffic citations issued or the revenue generated by such equipment.
(6) As used in this section, the term "automated vehicle identification system" means a system whereby:
(a) A machine is used to automatically detect a violation of a traffic regulation and simultaneously record a photograph of the vehicle, the operator of the vehicle, and the license plate of the vehicle; and
(b) A penalty assessment notice or summons and complaint is issued to the registered owner of the motor vehicle.
HISTORY: Source:. L. 97: Entire section added, p. 1667, § 1, effective June 5.L. 99: (1.5) and (4.5) added and (2), (4), and (5) amended, p. 612, § 1, effective May 17.L. 2002: (2)(a), (2)(d), and (4.5) amended and (2)(f), (2)(g), and (4.7) added, pp. 570, 572, § § 1, 2, effective May 24.L. 2004: (2)(d) amended, p. 351, § 1, effective August 4.L. 2008: (1.5) and (2)(g)(I) amended and (1.7) and (4)(b)(III) added, pp. 2080, 2081, § § 4, 5, effective June 3.L. 2009: (2)(d) amended, (SB 09-222), ch. 150, p. 629, § 1, effective August 5.
Cross references: Section 1 of chapter 412, Session Laws of Colorado 2008, provides that the act amending subsections (1.5) and (2)(g)(I) and enacting subsections (1.7) and (4)(b)(III) shall be known and may be cited as the "Charles Mather Highway Safety Act".
ANNOTATION
This section supersedes conflicting provisions of municipal ordinances. Regulation of automated vehicle identification systems to enforce traffic laws is a matter of mixed local and state concern. In the event of conflict, state law prevails. City of Commerce City v. State, 40 P.3d 1273 (Colo. 2002).
Monday, August 29, 2011
Lessons That Lead To Success
One of the most important lessons I would like to teach my son is that being smart is sometimes dumb. "Academic Intelligence" offers almost no real preparation for lifes challenges. On the other hand, "emotional intelligence" is the key to determining how well we can use whatever other skill we have, including raw intellect.
I have learned many lessons from living on my own, but the greatest lesson I learned came from meeting my husband and studying for the LSAT. I had neither emotional aptitude nor intellectual aptitude. Lesson #1 I learned from my husband. It is the lesson that people who know and manage their own feelings well, and read and deal effectively with other people's feelings--are at an advantage in any domain of life, whether romance and intimate relationships or picking the unspoken rules that govern success in organizational politics.
Furthermore, lesson #2 I learned from studying from the LSAT. And it is that people with well-developed emotional skills are also more likely to be content and effective in their lives. Not only that but these people are better able to master the habits of mind that foster their own productivity. And people who can not direct some control over their emotional life will fight inner battles that sabotage their ability for focused work and clear thought.
Growing up I felt as thought I had more emotional intelligence than academic intelligence. And my greatest success came when I learned to balance my logical aptitude with my emotional aptitude. Once I did that, I became clearer in my thinking and my work became more focused.
I want to train my son is in personal intelligence. This will be quite the challenge for I was not trained in personal intelligence. I have higher "intrapersonal intelligence" than interpersonal intelligence. But this is the cross in life I must bear.
I have learned many lessons from living on my own, but the greatest lesson I learned came from meeting my husband and studying for the LSAT. I had neither emotional aptitude nor intellectual aptitude. Lesson #1 I learned from my husband. It is the lesson that people who know and manage their own feelings well, and read and deal effectively with other people's feelings--are at an advantage in any domain of life, whether romance and intimate relationships or picking the unspoken rules that govern success in organizational politics.
Furthermore, lesson #2 I learned from studying from the LSAT. And it is that people with well-developed emotional skills are also more likely to be content and effective in their lives. Not only that but these people are better able to master the habits of mind that foster their own productivity. And people who can not direct some control over their emotional life will fight inner battles that sabotage their ability for focused work and clear thought.
Growing up I felt as thought I had more emotional intelligence than academic intelligence. And my greatest success came when I learned to balance my logical aptitude with my emotional aptitude. Once I did that, I became clearer in my thinking and my work became more focused.
I want to train my son is in personal intelligence. This will be quite the challenge for I was not trained in personal intelligence. I have higher "intrapersonal intelligence" than interpersonal intelligence. But this is the cross in life I must bear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)