7 Habit of Highly Effective People

I read the “7 Habits of Highly Effective People” back in 1990 and it helped change my life. You could say that the advice is just obvious and you are right. But the greatest truths are usually simple things that “everybody knows” but doesn’t seem to appreciate. In many ways, it is like a diet & exercise program. Everybody knows how to lose weight and get in better shape, but not many people do it right.

You are only really changed by the people you meet and the books you read and then only if you think about them. Reading the 7 Habits made me think about my priorities in life. I was reading a lot of similar things at that time. I did the usual Peter Drucker and Tom Peters books popular at the time and read a lot about organizational theory in general. Covey's book was certainly not the only influence on me and I am not attributing to the book magical powers, but it helped me. For example, that the book helped me work less and get more done. At the time, I consciously and specifically thought about my work life in relation to the 7 habits. I used to work a lot but not always highly effectively. I often would put in 16-hour days when I was building my career. It was not working well for my health, my family and even for my career. After reading the book, I felt I had a defensible reason to work less, work smarter and put more balance in my life. I started to "start with the end in mind" which made me quit doing a lot of things that were not very useful and avoid lots of meetings. I still don't think that you can expect to be successful if you work only eight hours a day, but on most days 9-10 hours is enough if you do them right. Covey's practical time management techniques made my shorter hours possible and his principles gave me reason to do it.

Even before reading the book, I believed in the idea that you should "serve the principle, not the master." This made me unpopular with some of my bosses in the short term, but a life where you make decisions based on principles is better than one where you are pushed around by expedients or pulled along by your ephemeral desires. Good people recognize this as do good bosses and you really should not care about the opinions of others. Stephen Covey talked about a principle centered life and that made sense to me. He was right. In fact, I can trace almost all my mistakes and regrets to instances when I cut corners or did not act in clear accordance with my principles. You really cannot be happy if you violate your principles and you don't deserve to be.

The other thing that the book confirmed for me was to be proactive. Don't cry about your problems or become a victim; figure out what to do to change the situations you don't like and then do those things.

Critics of Covey say that his ideas were simplistic. Life is indeed complex, but the basic structure of our responses really can be simple. They must be simple if we are to make them work. It worked for me for more than twenty years. I think that the "secret" of life is indeed the simplicity of thinking through and adhering to strong principles. Of course, simple solutions are not always easy ones.

Stephen Covey is dead. We should not mourn for the life well led, but I feel a loss. I met him only once in person and we talked for only a few minutes, but I felt I knew him from the work he shared. You can know people through their work and I am a better person for having known Stephen Covey. He left a legacy. He was a force for good.

Posted by Christine & John at July 17, 2012 6:14 AM
Comments
Comment #348651

I spoke, in the previous post, about my son putting everything he had on the line to purchase a business. And I spoke of the 16-18 hour days he put in to build that business. When I retired several years ago, I worked with him for a couple of summers and I worked those long days with him. I agree with you, it was taking a toll on his health, and eventually cost him his marriage of 23 years. In the past couple of years, he has managed to delegate authority to a foreman. He has also cut back on the hours he works. In short, he is taking time to smell the roses.

The ignorant statements by the president are personal for me. Obama has never created anything in his life. He has lived off public funds and has never created one job, and yet has the nerve to tell the actual job creators what they should do and who they should be beholding to.

The left is trying to defend Obama and revise what he was saying, and I have said, he stated his beliefs. How do I know that; because this is the mindset and foundation beliefs of the liberal; that the government is the reason for all success.

This story has failed to make it to the liberal media, yet the story is getting out. Business groups and Chamber of Commerce have heard Obama and understand what he is saying, is what he believes:

“David Chavern, chief operating officer of the Chamber of Commerce, accused Obama of slighting the remarkable achievements of extraordinary individuals.
“We should applaud the risk-takers and the dreamers who are willing to stand out from the crowd,” Chavern said in a Chamber blog. “Rather than denigrate what these people have done, we need to encourage more people to be like them.”
The National Federation of Independent Business said the president’s “unfortunate remarks over the weekend show an utter lack of understanding and appreciation for the people who take a huge personal risk and work endless hours to start a business and create jobs.”
“I’m sure every small-business owner who took a second mortgage on their home, maxed out their credit cards or borrowed money from their own retirement savings to start their business disagrees strongly with President Obama’s claim. They know that hard work does matter,” the group also said.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/17/business-groups-criticize-obama-over-remarks-about-government-role-in-success/#ixzz20t0f2RM4

The Obama campaign response to this was:

“”As President Obama said, those who start businesses succeed because of their individual initiative — their drive, hard work, and creativity,” LaBolt said in a statement. “But there are critical actions we must take to support businesses and encourage new ones — that means we need the best infrastructure, a good education system, and affordable, domestic sources of clean energy. Those are investments we make not as individuals, but as Americans, and our nation as a whole benefits from them.”

It’s the same old tired rhetoric from the left: a call for more spending on education, which you have pointed out, has increased many times over and is still a failure. And a call for spending more tax dollars on failed “affordable clean energy”. What a crock; how many jobs has Obama’s clean energy created? Better yet, how many jobs have been destroyed by the Obama EPA regulations on business?

Obama goes on to say:

“”If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen,” he said. “The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.”


I believe some people are successful in spite of government interference. This is a fundamental difference between the ideology of liberals and those of conservatives. The “somebody” that has driven people to become exceptional and create is in many, many situations, are the parents. Why are so many blacks on the government dole? Because the government has made a whole race of people dependent upon the government handout. Because the liberal Democrat Party has done their best to destroy the black family. What Obama and the liberals are doing is playing on the feelings of blacks and promising them it is the government’s duty to take from those who have achieved and give to those who don’t. Remember Hillary’s comment, “it’s takes a village”; this is the mindset of the left. That only government can raise children and care for the family. I taught my son individualism; I taught him that hard work was rewarded; and I taught him by example, that it was not government’s responsibility to raise my family, that God had given me that job.

The less that government involves itself in our lives, the more successful our nation will become.

Posted by: Frank at July 17, 2012 9:53 AM
Comment #348652

This is an example of Obama’s “Changed” America. This is the result of Obama’s mentality that the world owes the downtrodden. This is the result of billions of dollars spent of a failed public education system. This is the result of throwing personal responsibility out the door. I am a black man and this video makes me embarassed:

http://www.news4jax.com/news/Flash-mob-causes-havoc-at-Walmart/-/475880/15568130/-/vt1vdlz/-/index.html

Why is it; this group of teens are all black? What kind of message has Obama and the liberals send to these teens? Is this an example of the liberal’s “it takes a village” to raise children? And we wonder why there are a higher percentage of blacks in our prisons. Of course, the liberals’ believe the prisons are full of blacks as a result of racism. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Posted by: Frank at July 17, 2012 10:10 AM
Comment #348653

I read much of his 7 habits book. No substance. Perhaps he was ahead of his time in regards to corporate buzzwords, a better BS’r, a genius at speaking without saying anything.

By the way is there anyone famous you haven’t met?

Posted by: Schwamp at July 17, 2012 10:46 AM
Comment #348657

Frank is incredibly angry — not at what the president actually said, but at what he wants to claim the president said.

Posted by: Adrienne at July 17, 2012 1:26 PM
Comment #348664

Frank,

“This is a fundamental difference between the ideology of liberals and those of conservatives.”

No Frank, sorry.

The fundamental difference between conservatives and everybody else is that we don’t need someone to explain to us what someones words mean or what their motivation is.

From day one of this administration your Messiah Limbaugh has told you that Obama’s plan first and foremost was to ruin America, that Obama hated America, and that your Messiah Limbaugh wanted him to fail. This is the same guy, BTW that told his audience (jokingly of course), that things started going downhill in this country when women got the vote.

Despite your contemptable opinion this country is moving forward.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 17, 2012 3:36 PM
Comment #348668

“Be Proactive” - brilliant
“Begin with the end in mind” In other words, planning can be good, duh.
“Seek First to Understand, then be Understood” or is it vice versa? anyway, yes it helps to know what your doing.
“Put First Things First” Is there another way?
“Thing Win-Win” Michael Scott was big on this one.

For this he made millions. Only in America. God bless him.

Posted by: Schwamp at July 17, 2012 4:14 PM
Comment #348672

Adrienne; yes I am angry at the inept arrogance of this clown in the WH.

Rocky Marks: sorry, I came up with my points all by myself; Rush Limbaugh was not consulted.

By the way, the way you talk about Limbaugh; you must fear him very much.

Schwamp: another attack on an America who made money. Tell me, is there any rich people the left don’t hate, except Al Gore, Hollywood, and hmmm, what’s that fascist’s name??? Oh yes…George Soros? Let’s not forget the Kennedy’s, and John Kerry (Heinz).

Posted by: Frank at July 17, 2012 5:12 PM
Comment #348673

Schwamp

I found it very simple but very useful. I perhaps read somethings into it. I suppose it is like my comparison to exercise & diet. Most sensible program work, as long as you do them. Sometimes it is just good to think through a program. I always suffered from impatience. The seek first to understand was useful to me.

You can make fun of it if you like and I can understand how you might. I think some of my success in life resulted from the fruit that started with these seeds.

And I have noticed that very few people actually do these simple things that you dismiss with “duh”. In my experience, most people never put first things first or start with the end in mind. And many people think win-win is for chumps. These are the people I usually find get left behind.

Re famous people - I have met a lot of people. I used to attend lots of events and get invited to a lot of programs.

Posted by: C&J at July 17, 2012 5:13 PM
Comment #348675

Frank

I have been poor and I have been not poor. It is better to be not poor.

I don’t understand the attacks on success.

Stephen Covey made millions because he appealed to and helped people like me. I don’t begrudge him the $20 he made when I bought his book. It was a voluntary transaction all around. Those who make money by satisfying the wants and needs of others should be proud of themselves and should be praised.

I find, however, that envy is a strong emotion. It sometimes masquerades as justice.

Posted by: C&J at July 17, 2012 5:17 PM
Comment #348677

Frank,

“By the way, the way you talk about Limbaugh; you must fear him very much.”

Wow, thanks for telling me how I feel. Thousands of comedians out of work and we get you.

This is yet another abhorrent trait of the fringers.

Please, I don’t envy Limbaugh, and I don’t fear him either. Why would I fear a pompous, blowhard, drug addict like Limbaugh? Is he going to break into my house when I’m away, and bore my cats to death?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 17, 2012 5:31 PM
Comment #348689

Rocky Marks; I have known people who have drug problems. Some of them have managed to kick the habit and some have not. Rush Limbaugh was hooked on prescription pain pills and seems to have overcome the habit. I credit him for his success and I think you are a very small person for the comments you make. Evidently, none of your family has ever been hooked on drugs or alcohol. My fater was an alcoholic and I saw him waste every penny he made on the next drink; so I commend Limbaugh for his success.

I don’t think it’s just Rush Limbaugh; I believe it is all conservatives who terrify the left. I gave Adam Ducker a list of conservative black folks the other day and asked him to comment on each; he would not. He named a couple and voiced his opinion why he did not like them, but that was all. I promise you, if anyone on the left on WB was to comment on each of the very successful blacks on the list; the left would attack them rather than recognize their accomplishments. This is the nature of the beast; the left hates conservatives; especially those of influence.

C&J, I heard today that Stephen Covey sold over 20 million copies of his book in many countries. The left does have great envy for successful conservatives. They would make fun of Covey speaking to thousands; but have no problem with Bill Clinton making millions at speaking engagements. I have no problem with people making money, as long as it’s legal. I have no problem with liberals making money. Like you, I have been poor and I have been successful and comfortable; and I like success much better.

If you will notice the comments of liberals; they always have negative comments about successful people. This is what Obama believes; the left defends Obama against accusations that he associated with communist/socialist in Chicago; and the left always defends Obama against charges of redistribution of wealth, but in fact this is just what Obama believes. The comments made by liberals are the comments f Obama; same-same. How can the left on WB attack those who are successful and who have made money; and at the same time say we are attacking Obama when we say he believes the same thing.

Posted by: Frank at July 17, 2012 7:14 PM
Comment #348690

Frank,

The left doesn’t hate people who are wealthy. It hates the concentration of the nation’s wealth in a small percentage of the population. It doesn’t want to take money from the rich and give it to the poor. It wants to create a society in which a greater percentage of the population shares in the wealth of the nation. It wants a strong and growing middle class not a diminishing middle class saddled with extraordinary debt and a society with increasing wealth disparity.

Harry Truman summed up the issue very well in a speech in 1948:

“The party of progressive liberalism—the Democratic Party—believes today, as it has always believed, that it is the duty of popular government to protect and promote the interests, not of just the privileged few, but of all the groups and individuals in our Nation.

The Democratic Party believes today, as it has always believed, that vigilance and action are needed not only to protect the people from concentrations of wealth and power, but to keep concentrated wealth and power from destroying itself, and the Nation with it.”

Posted by: Rich at July 17, 2012 7:29 PM
Comment #348691

Frank,

“Rocky Marks; I have known people who have drug problems. Some of them have managed to kick the habit and some have not. Rush Limbaugh was hooked on prescription pain pills and seems to have overcome the habit. I credit him for his success and I think you are a very small person for the comments you make.”

Rush has no pity on anyone else, why should I pity him?

Oh, and BTW, once you’re an addict, you are always an addict.

“I don’t think it’s just Rush Limbaugh; I believe it is all conservatives who terrify the left.”

I suppose that thought probably gets you through the night, but it is patently untrue.
As far as your list of conservative blacks, whatever floats their collective boat. I don’t like, or dislike people simply based on their political persuasion. IMHO anybody that does is rather shallow.
Also, I feel anyone who surrounds themselves primarily with like minded people lives a dull life, they’re never intellectually challenged.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 17, 2012 7:32 PM
Comment #348702

No Rocky they are intellectlly challenged. My two sons run there own business but they are smart enought not to ruin there marrage. And how do you do that it’s not that you delagate you have to remember money is not more important then family. but greed drives the republican mind set.

Posted by: Jeff at July 17, 2012 10:02 PM
Comment #348719

Jeff

“greed drives the republican mind set”

I would comment on that, but if you read it twice you will see how dumb such a blanket statement is. Even you can’t believe that and you should not argue in your rhetoric what you know in your heart is not true.

Do you think the divorce rate is higher among Republicans or Democrats? Who gives more to charity, liberals or conservatives? If you answer both these questions correctly, you will notice that the basis of your blanket statement really doesn’t hold.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2012 6:32 AM
Comment #348732

C&J If you wish to accuse me of hyperbole ok fair enough now do you think you could adress some of the way over the top hyperbole of Frank and TomT and bilinflorida and you see where im’n going?

Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 10:22 AM
Comment #348733

Rich, let me ask you a question, since you hold to the liberal idea that some people have all the wealth and some don’t; how do you propose evenly dividing the wealth? Since, in a capitalist society, wealth comes from hard work, and since hard work comes from working a job, and since Obama’s economy has seen the job market in the tank for 4 years; how do you propose spreading the wealth?

The left does hate those who make money. In the mind of a Democrat, the only way wealth can be taken from one and given to another is through taxes. The “rich” people are taxed, because it’s unfair that they should have wealth, and the taxes are given to the “poor” in the form of welfare, food stamps, and now Obamacare. Of course the “poor” do not get all the tax dollars taken from the “rich”, they only get a small portion; the rest is used on socialist projects like failed “clean energy”, bailing out “bankrupt” Democrat controlled states and cites, bailing out public and auto union pensions.

Rich, the left hates those who are successful because every time Obama opens his mouth, he is driving a wedge between the American people; every time he opens his mouth he is condemning those who “have” and promising free stuff to those who “have not”

Rocky Marks: re/Rush Limbaugh having not pity. In 2008, Rush Limbaugh was rated as #10 celebrity in giving to charity and children’s medical research. He has given millions of dollars over the years to the families of slain service men and cops, and to leukemia research. Name me a liberal talk show host who has enough “pity” on the needy as Rush does?

The list of conservative blacks given to Adam Ducker was not about “like” or “dislike”; it was about conservative blacks being personally attacked for their conservative views. They are called “Oreo’s “ or “Uncle Toms” because it is incomprehensible that black person could be conservative or Republican. Adam Ducker failed to answer the question.

Re/Jeff’s comment; it is an ignorant statement. Two out of three marriages end in divorce and there are many reasons for divorce.

“No Rocky they are intellectlly challenged. My two sons run there own business but they are smart enought not to ruin there marrage. And how do you do that it’s not that you delagate you have to remember money is not more important then family. but greed drives the republican mind set.”
Posted by: Jeff at July 17, 2012 10:02 PM

Jeff, you have 6 spelling errors and one punctuation error in this paragraph. So, not only is it a ridiculous blanket statement; it is also grammatically incorrect.

Posted by: Frank at July 18, 2012 10:38 AM
Comment #348734

jeff, why have you brought up my name? I haven’t even commented on this post.

Posted by: Billinflorida at July 18, 2012 10:44 AM
Comment #348738

Well Frank it’s the best I can do with the small keys on my smart phone. I was blessed with large fimgers .

Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 12:23 PM
Comment #348739

Jeff, are you also blaming the smart phone and large fingers for this:

“No Rocky they are intellectlly challenged…but greed drives the republican mind set.”

Posted by: Jeff at July 17, 2012 10:02 PM

These statements are just liberal hack comments; meant to personally attack conservatives.

It isn’t Republicans who are obsessed with taking tax money from successful people. You mistake “leave me alone” for greed. Conservatives have absolutly no problem with conservatives, liberals, blacks, Hispanics, gays, or anyone else making money. It is the left who is obsessed with “money”.

Posted by: Frank at July 18, 2012 12:50 PM
Comment #348740

And the reason I use my phone is I have better thngs to do then insult people lke you. And it’s too easy.

Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 12:54 PM
Comment #348742

“And the reason I use my phone is I have better thngs to do then insult people lke you. And it’s too easy.”

Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 12:54 PM

I believe you mean “than insult”. So you are saying, your purpose for writing on WB is to insult Conservatives? I guess insulting someone is always “easy”; the left is expert on it.

Posted by: Frank at July 18, 2012 1:01 PM
Comment #348743

“It is the left who is obsessed with “money”.”

Sorry Frank, but that is just simply not true at all.
They are obsessed with other peoples money.
That is why they don’t see the hypocrisy in typing other people don’t care enough or give enough, on their smart phone with its monthly data plan.

Posted by: kctim at July 18, 2012 1:02 PM
Comment #348745

Mrs. Romney has a pretty dancing horse.

Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 1:11 PM
Comment #348746

LOL, thanks kctim, I stand corrected. They are obsessed with other people’s money.

“Mrs. Romney has a pretty dancing horse.”
Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 1:11 PM

And your point is, Jeff? My neighbor owns and breeds Tennessee Walking horses. Are you insinuating that owning a horse is somehow evil? Jeff, the more you punch the keys on your smart phone with your clubby fingers, the more rediculous you sound.

Posted by: Frank at July 18, 2012 1:32 PM
Comment #348749

Bill,

“Rush Limbaugh having not pity. In 2008, Rush Limbaugh was rated as #10 celebrity in giving to charity and children’s medical research. He has given millions of dollars over the years to the families of slain service men and cops, and to leukemia research.”

So that Michael J fox thing was just an aberration?

Sorry, there is a vast difference between pity, and charity.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2012 3:41 PM
Comment #348750

“Sorry, there is a vast difference between pity, and charity”

True Rocky, but neither should be used to create legislation or as a platform to run for President.

Posted by: kctim at July 18, 2012 3:54 PM
Comment #348754

“Bill,

“Rush Limbaugh having not pity. In 2008, Rush Limbaugh was rated as #10 celebrity in giving to charity and children’s medical research. He has given millions of dollars over the years to the families of slain service men and cops, and to leukemia research.”

So that Michael J fox thing was just an aberration?

Sorry, there is a vast difference between pity, and charity.

Rocky”

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2012 3:41 PM

First thing Rocky Marks, I am Frank and not Bill.

Definition of PITY

a: sympathetic sorrow for one suffering, distressed, or unhappy b: capacity to feel pity

“Synonym Discussion of PITY

pity, compassion, commiseration, condolence, sympathy mean the act or capacity for sharing the painful feelings of another. pity implies tender or sometimes slightly contemptuous sorrow for one in misery or distress . compassion implies pity coupled with an urgent desire to aid or to spare . commiseration suggests pity expressed outwardly in exclamations, tears, or words of comfort . condolence applies chiefly to formal expression of grief to one who has suffered loss . sympathy often suggests a tender concern but can also imply a power to enter into another’s emotional experience of any sort .”

Definition of CHARITY:

1: benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity

2
a: generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also: aid given to those in need
b: an institution engaged in relief of the poor
c: public provision for the relief of the needy

3
a: a gift for public benevolent purposes
b: an institution (as a hospital) founded by such a gift

4: lenient judgment of others”

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/charity?show=0&t=1342642177

Rocky, now you have to ask yourself; is Rush Limbaugh Piteous or is he Charitable? It doesn’t matter to me; both show compassion and I want to hear you say Rush is compassionate

Posted by: Frank at July 18, 2012 4:20 PM
Comment #348759

Frank,

“I want to hear you say Rush is compassionate.”

Yeah, good luck with that.

Just how much “compassion” did Rush show the people of Haiti after the earthquake?

Oh, and BTW, how much money did the compassionate Rush give to charities above and beyond the 10% he can write off to the IRS?

Just asking.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2012 5:09 PM
Comment #348763

I don’t know Rocky, but you seem to be on a role; what about Haiti and what about how much he gave? You tell us, since you have all the answers. But, are you sure you want to talk about charitable giving: conservatives have always been more charitable that liberals. That is, unless the liberals are using someone else’s money.

Posted by: Frank at July 18, 2012 6:05 PM
Comment #348766

That’s so cute the way Frank and Kctim tag team. Are you guys a couple of fudge packers? Not that I would hold that aganst anyone.

Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 6:43 PM
Comment #348767

Jeff

Mrs. Romney riding a horse helps her cope with her MS.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2012 6:51 PM
Comment #348769

C&J I do know that but not this horse.

Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 7:10 PM
Comment #348771

Frank,

“conservatives have always been more charitable that liberals.”

Yeah, you guys keep saying that, and I don’t want to sound cynical here, but do you give more to charity than you can write off your taxes?

I mean that would be truly charitable.

“…what about Haiti…”

Apparently Rush warned his listeners off of Haiti saying that; “You already give to Haitian relief - it’s called the income tax.”

Now of course he immediately backed away from the comment saying that wasn’t what he meant, but like Fluke, and Fox, and Chelsea Clinton, and the multitude of others he has insulted, his MO seems to be that he can say virtually anything he wants to, no matter how insulting, and get away with it by giving some lame, half-assed apology.

Oh, and he gets away with it because his listeners don’t seem to give a rats ass because he is insulting “liberals”.

Yeah, he sure is a compassionate guy.

Right…

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2012 7:30 PM
Comment #348773

Rocky

RE giving to charity - I suppose liberals don’t deduct their charitable contributions.

But even if you write off 40%, you still are giving away 60%.

Many studies indicate that conservatives are more generous. I don’t think it is more generosity per se, but rather a different view. If you believe in responsibility, you take action.

My original post was about the 7 Habits. One of the things Stephen Covey talked about was the circle of concern and the circle of influence. We might be concerned about lots of things, but unable to do much practical to change the situation. On the other hand, there are things we can do that make a big difference.

Effective people concentrate on what they can influence. Ineffective people obsess over things they cannot. When I give to charity or participate in a volunteer activity, I am taking direct responsibility for things I can influence. When I decry the plight of the poor or deplore racism, I am just talking.

Some of this describes the difference between liberals and conservatives.

Jeff

How did you get such detailed information about which horses she rides? And what difference does that make to you? Many people like horses. My daughter used to love ponies. In fact, I think that loving horses and ponies is very common among women and girls. If you don’t like horses, that is your business, but others don’t share your opinion.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2012 7:52 PM
Comment #348774

Ot the horses she may ride but the dancing hrse in London. Sorry about the missed letters damn little buttons .

Posted by: Jeff at July 18, 2012 8:05 PM
Comment #348775

Jack,

“Many studies indicate that conservatives are more generous.”

However, when it’s repeated aud nauseum the less impresive it seems and the more it becomes like a school yard game of “my dads better than yours”.

Yeah, OK, that’s great. I get it. You win.

Like I said before, we can all still only do what we are capable of doing.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2012 8:07 PM
Comment #348776

Rocky

The reason I bring it up is to counter what I perceive as a fallacious liberal charge that conservatives are stingy and greedy. In fact, the opposite is true. When liberals stop using words like greedy, stingy and selfish as modifiers of conservative, I will stop having to point out the fallacy of their contention.

re “we can all still only do what we are capable of doing.” This is obviously true, but it is incomplete. We have an affirmative duty to develop our skills and talents so that we can do more.

IMO - too many people ignore dynamism. What we are today is the result of choices we made during our lives. Lots of luck is involved, but what you become is your responsibility. If a person’s poor decisions result in his being unable to discharge his responsibilities to God, man and country, the practical effect is the same as someone who is too stingy.

So indeed you can only do what you are capable of doing, but those who have done nothing to improve their capabilities are losers. A person who cannot produce enough even for himself cannot be generous and he has failed in his duty to his fellow human beings.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2012 8:30 PM
Comment #348779

Jack,

“We have an affirmative duty to develop our skills and talents so that we can do more.”

And if that is not ingrained by the time we become adults…

I come from a two parent family, my mother didn’t go back to work until it became necessary to pay for the Parochial School I and my siblings attended. My parents took the time to be involved in our schooling.

I was lucky.

BTW, giving 110% is a fallacy. It can’t be done.

“When liberals stop using words like greedy, stingy and selfish as modifiers of conservative, I will stop having to point out the fallacy of their contention.”

And your point is?

The “liberals” that use this phraseology are using it to pull your chain. If they haven’t gotten it by now they’re not going to.

BTW, I don’t think I’ve ever used the term “greedy conservative” on this blog before. Frankly, I don’t need it to be explained to me again.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2012 9:00 PM
Comment #348793

Rocky

“And if that is not ingrained by the time we become adults…” Many fail at their duty. What can we say?

Re pointing out the liberal error - We have to counter the claims each time or they get to be believed. Many liberals in fact do believe this crap. It is a little tedious to slap them down each time but speaking of duty, that is one of mine.

When I bring up the point with you, it is not always aimed in your direction. I am surprised at the number of people who read this blog but evidently never write a comment. I write to point it out to them.

You know that I respect your opinions even when we disagree and I hope that my comments to you reflect that. There are some here, however, who I know are unteachable. I don’t ever hope to change their minds with logic or facts. I am writing over their heads to others who might be reading.

Posted by: C&J at July 18, 2012 9:32 PM
Comment #348826

“Frank,
“conservatives have always been more charitable that liberals.”
Yeah, you guys keep saying that, and I don’t want to sound cynical here, but do you give more to charity than you can write off your taxes?
I mean that would be truly charitable.”

Well Rocky, I give about 12-13% of my income to charity. I answered your question, now how about telling us how much you give to charity?

“…what about Haiti…”
Apparently Rush warned his listeners off of Haiti saying that; “You already give to Haitian relief - it’s called the income tax.”
Now of course he immediately backed away from the comment saying that wasn’t what he meant, but like Fluke, and Fox, and Chelsea Clinton, and the multitude of others he has insulted, his MO seems to be that he can say virtually anything he wants to, no matter how insulting, and get away with it by giving some lame, half-assed apology.
Oh, and he gets away with it because his listeners don’t seem to give a rats ass because he is insulting “liberals”.”

So are we talking about Rush Limbaugh’s giving to charity or are we doing personal attacks again? I find it interesting that a liberal can never stick to the subject; it always comes back to personal attacks.

Posted by: Frank at July 18, 2012 10:09 PM
Comment #348845

Frank,

“Well Rocky, I give about 12-13% of my income to charity. I answered your question…”

No, actually you didn’t.

The question was; “…do you give more to charity than you can write off your taxes?”

“I find it interesting that a liberal can never stick to the subject; it always comes back to personal attacks.”

Pot, meet kettle.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2012 10:49 PM
Comment #348847

Jack,

“You know that I respect your opinions even when we disagree and I hope that my comments to you reflect that.”

I know you aren’t just glad-handing and the feeling is mutual.

I have to get up for a job at 3AM so I have to cut this short.

Apparently Sheriff Joe thinks he has evidence that Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-arpaio-obama-birth-certificate-fraudulent-20120718,0,596040.story

I can’t wait.


Frank,

Since when did telling the truth become an attack?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 18, 2012 11:02 PM
Comment #349280


You are only really changed by the people you meet and the books you read and then only if you think about them. Reading the 7 Habits made me think about my priorities in life. I was reading a lot of similar things at that time. I did the usual Peter Drucker and Tom Peters books popular at the time and read a lot about organizational theory in general. Covey’s book was certainly not the only influence on me and I am not attributing to the book magical powers, but it helped me. For example, that the book helped me work less and get more done. At the time, I consciously and specifically thought about my work life in relation to the 7 habits. I used to work a lot but not always highly effectively. I often would put in 16-hour days when I was building my career. It was not working well for my health, my family and even for my career. After reading the book, I felt I had a defensible reason to work less, work smarter and put more balance in my life. I started to “start with the end in mind” which made me quit doing a lot of things that were not very useful and avoid lots of meetings. I still don’t think that you can expect to be successful if you work only eight hours a day, but on most days 9-10 hours is enough if you do them right. Covey’s practical time management techniques made my shorter hours possible and his principles gave me reason to do it.

Posted by: cbmart at July 26, 2012 4:27 AM
Comment #349479

There are many special leather-based fashion handbags available; nonetheless not all of them possess a comparable quality. Leather-based fashion handbag range, centered upon that produces the true bags to what the substance is planned out of. Getting acceptable handbags is essential in picking your wardrobe.

Posted by: Finding the Best Fashion Handbag at July 28, 2012 12:00 PM
Comment #357376

I admire you very much, but I am sorry I have to copy your words that I love very much.

Posted by: Burberry Outlet at November 19, 2012 2:34 AM
Post a comment