CAG@LOCH#41
In response to a previous post, yesterday morning i had what may have been the most calm, sane, and mature discussion with a significant other over relationship issues of my life (such an extensive pool of data). Go us. It's an exceedingly good feeling to be able to talk with Chris about anything frankly, even the differences between what we feel for each other, without the paranoid (but nonetheless learned) fear of break-up-level offense. This particular discussion may even be worth memorializing in some form of impressionist text-visual literature.
On a chocolate-and-creme day, nothing beats a soy mocha and a vegan cream-filled chocolate chip cookie sandwich. While their respective popularities are indeed inversely proportional to the lengths of their names, i feel in my heart that this should not be so, and one of these two variables should be remedied in the second of the pair.
In seeking ways to improve my performance as a TA i've come across what promise to be very helpful resources, from a simple article in the Online Encyclopaedia of Mathematics to an extensive collection of notes, examples, problems, and lecture videos at MIT's OpenCourseWare site. Feel free to judge me poorly for wanting to use MIT lecture notes in a Virginia Tech undergraduate mathematics course. You still won't stop me.
One thing contradancing will teach you, if you let it, is to look people in the eyes. The only way to keep from getting nauseatingly dizzy through the periodic olio of moves is to focus on the only object that remains stationary relative to you - your partner. There is indeed a connection formed between people who fixate upon each other's eyes, brief and elsewhere focused a time though it may be in the midst of a caller's instructions. And if you ever want to exude confidence, this is the way to do it.
There's a guy abouts the store ranting about a variety of topics, including the pomposity with which U.S. citizens refer to themselves and their fellow citizens as "Americans". He has a barrage of interesting ideas spilling forth, but this one in particular brings up a resolution of mine a long time in the making, and not finalized now: to refer to us as "Americans". Jared Diamond actually clinched it by bringing up one of the named nations (Sioux?) of peoples native to the American continents, which was comprised of several distinct and often antagonistic tribes pressured into allegiance to deal with and repel the Europeans invading their territory and treating them as lesser beings. The name they adopted was happenstance, and may have referred to one of the several or even the land they occupied. But the name was incidental, and in light of the circumstances served merely as a common banner. This is the only role "America" serves for us, and though it also refers geographically to the connected continent(s) its meaning is clear from context. What some see as offensive is that the name of a continent is used to describe the people of a rather small subregion therein (and often the subregion itself). Would having having renamed ourself the United States of Louisiana made us any less arrogant? Would it have prevented any of the perceived problems we associate with our adoption of the continent's denomination (itself derivative from a European's name) for that of our own piece of it? I posit that our use of the possessive pronoun when referring to the land itself has wrought much worse than the choice of name. I have no evidence incriminating either scapegoat.
I will move away, eventually, regardless of who wins in 2008 or '10 or thenafter, unless by some absurd twist of happenstance the U.S. becomes the most nearly socialist country in the world, while others fall into upheaval and discontinue their higher education programs. The reason is that i've resolved to practive whatever i think best for all people to practice, which includes ending up in a different place than you began, by which means to spread, compare, and homogenize our customs, morals, and belief structures. FYI, it's not because of McCain, worthless though he appears to be as a candidate.
For the first time since undergrad (maybe high school), i bought a new zip-up hoodie. It's almost not my style anymore.
On a chocolate-and-creme day, nothing beats a soy mocha and a vegan cream-filled chocolate chip cookie sandwich. While their respective popularities are indeed inversely proportional to the lengths of their names, i feel in my heart that this should not be so, and one of these two variables should be remedied in the second of the pair.
In seeking ways to improve my performance as a TA i've come across what promise to be very helpful resources, from a simple article in the Online Encyclopaedia of Mathematics to an extensive collection of notes, examples, problems, and lecture videos at MIT's OpenCourseWare site. Feel free to judge me poorly for wanting to use MIT lecture notes in a Virginia Tech undergraduate mathematics course. You still won't stop me.
One thing contradancing will teach you, if you let it, is to look people in the eyes. The only way to keep from getting nauseatingly dizzy through the periodic olio of moves is to focus on the only object that remains stationary relative to you - your partner. There is indeed a connection formed between people who fixate upon each other's eyes, brief and elsewhere focused a time though it may be in the midst of a caller's instructions. And if you ever want to exude confidence, this is the way to do it.
There's a guy abouts the store ranting about a variety of topics, including the pomposity with which U.S. citizens refer to themselves and their fellow citizens as "Americans". He has a barrage of interesting ideas spilling forth, but this one in particular brings up a resolution of mine a long time in the making, and not finalized now: to refer to us as "Americans". Jared Diamond actually clinched it by bringing up one of the named nations (Sioux?) of peoples native to the American continents, which was comprised of several distinct and often antagonistic tribes pressured into allegiance to deal with and repel the Europeans invading their territory and treating them as lesser beings. The name they adopted was happenstance, and may have referred to one of the several or even the land they occupied. But the name was incidental, and in light of the circumstances served merely as a common banner. This is the only role "America" serves for us, and though it also refers geographically to the connected continent(s) its meaning is clear from context. What some see as offensive is that the name of a continent is used to describe the people of a rather small subregion therein (and often the subregion itself). Would having having renamed ourself the United States of Louisiana made us any less arrogant? Would it have prevented any of the perceived problems we associate with our adoption of the continent's denomination (itself derivative from a European's name) for that of our own piece of it? I posit that our use of the possessive pronoun when referring to the land itself has wrought much worse than the choice of name. I have no evidence incriminating either scapegoat.
I will move away, eventually, regardless of who wins in 2008 or '10 or thenafter, unless by some absurd twist of happenstance the U.S. becomes the most nearly socialist country in the world, while others fall into upheaval and discontinue their higher education programs. The reason is that i've resolved to practive whatever i think best for all people to practice, which includes ending up in a different place than you began, by which means to spread, compare, and homogenize our customs, morals, and belief structures. FYI, it's not because of McCain, worthless though he appears to be as a candidate.
For the first time since undergrad (maybe high school), i bought a new zip-up hoodie. It's almost not my style anymore.