SAIL

Dating is a complicated process for any couple. It takes hard work on both ends to maintain a satisfying relationship. Nowadays, I feel as though dating is a much harder process due to certain capacities: timing, age differences, jobs, location, or feelings in general. A complexity of a relationship that is often so prominent in relationships- Who wears the pants? Who takes the lead in a relationship? This question made me wonder… Is this really why opposites attract?

In a relationship, two individuals with the exact same goals, interests, and personality types will probably not stick together for very long. It is obvious why given an example: Two people with extreme domineering personalities, will bicker and butt heads on too many petty things. Both of these individuals are blantantly trying to “wear the pants.” It is about who is leading over who, and that is  not a healthy relationship.

Leadership can be a concept involving several different capacities in a relationship; whether it pertains to a sexual relationship, friendly relationship, or a job-related relationship. The better that we understand leadership, and how to juggle diverse personalities and their impact on relationships. Whether you are zipping up the pants, taking them off, sewing the hole in them, shopping for a new pair, or getting the grass stains out; ask yourself this–> Who wears the pants?

One of my favorite song’s is Rusted Roots cover of You Can’t Always Get What You Want (and here are full lyrics). While the verses are resoundingly political, that’s not what I tend to focus on in this song. Instead, I like the chorus which states:

“You can’t always get what you want. But if you try sometimes, you just may find, you get what you need.”

We are such a materialistic and instantaneous society: we want what we want, and we want it now! However, if we considered what are true means of living are, and applied some of the leftover to those less fortunate, perhaps they could get what they need. The world has a funny way of working itself out, I’ve found. Call it karma, a miracle, destiny, or God- things somehow seem to be alright.

So next time you get frustrated or anxious because you can’t immediately get what you want, relax. Have some patience, sit back, and be amazed at the way the day ends.

It’s about time to tackle a prevalent problem: how people perceive us as leaders. Perception is vital when looking at leadership; what you display at any given time gives people a picture of who you are. Leaders who are in the media face this everyday: whenever they walk out of a conference, when they leader the restroom, even when they awkwardly shift in their seats during a meeting. Perception of leaders can also dwell into the classroom: take for example using your laptop during class or even texting while charging your phone—all while the instructor or guest speaker is speaking. Using your phone during class is rude, openly surfing the net while a professor is speaking is rude as well—and that creates an image for you as a person.

This post is not meant to put people on blast, but to raise awareness that people will always be forming a picture of you as a person at all times—in and out of class. Rudeness is one of the more prevalent ways that people use to view perception of you as a person and creates a persona about you that does not exactly carry positive connotations. So stop using your laptop in class or charging your phone and texting. The point of a class it to engage respectfully when needed and to listen to the time you are there. People are always looking and creating a picture about your character based off of your actions at all times, so as a leader don’t be rude and give a bad image of yourself and the class.

Some say that leaders are born rather than brought up. Leaders, in this context, are implied to have certain characteristics. For instance in this view, a leader is someone who is forthright, brave, optimistic and able to read their surroundings. These charactersitics portray traditional leading. In ealier classes we have determined that leadership comes in many diffrernt forms. We have established that it is the situation and its needs that bring forth a variety of leadership. Read the rest of this entry »

By Emily Barnhill

In this election year because of the economic climate in the United States many important issues have been overshadowed or just plainly ignored. Two of those topics are pet interests of mine the environment (which is not the direction this post is going in) and the Supreme Court. There has been little mention even with two weeks left to go in the campaign of how the potential Romney administration would affect the Court. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-winkler/romney-supreme-court_b_1997323.html?utm_hp_ref=supreme-court

During the next four years it is likely that Justice Ginsberg (age 79) will retire granted the notorious liberal won’t go out without a fight in a conservative administration; she plans to stay until she turns 82 like Justice Brandeis did. However she was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer three years ago and only 5% of patients survive past five years. Hopefully because it was caught early and is currently in remission she will get lucky and beat Brandeis’ record. There may also be replacements for Scalia and Kennedy both age 76, but those two aren’t as likely.

Even though recently Romney has come back to the ideological center to pick up the undecided votes, with a bit of success might I add, he stated previously that he would not appoint a moderate judge if president. He wants a judge along the lines of Clarence Thomas who according to a recent study was more conservative than 97% percent of the rest of the population. With a hardcore conservative taking the place of Ginsberg that could give the court a solid 6-3 vote in favor of the conservatives. Even if the moderate Kennedy swings left it wouldn’t make a difference like it does now. Kennedy is why today’s court configuration was able to pass Obamacare and other traditionally liberal decisions.

All of this being said I would like to bring up the politicization of the Court. It was designed to be an impartial 3^rd party to solve disputes concerning governmental action or inaction. So under that purpose their personal politics shouldn’t matter, they theoretically should be looking at statues, laws, and regulations without any political thought passing through their mind. However, this is an unrealistic goal. It is virtually impossible to forsake your personal ideology even when it’s the job your doing. This brings me to the question what role should parties play in the court? Should there be a fixed ratio system in place or should the fact just be ignored? One way to think about it is if the people vote a conservative president into office then in the back of their mind they should be accepting of another conservative appointee. Is there any truth to that or should the selection be more transparent and bipartisan?

The Supreme Court with its lack of media appeal and glamour still is an important leadership institution in the American system. Through deciding cases they are taking a leadership role by creating or adapting laws that the states and federal government must adhere to. They also lead by checking the power of our more visible leaders: the legislature and the executive branch. Many people have a probable with this concentration of leadership and power because they aren’t elected and serve for life. Do you think it is a just system? Is this the only way to go about the Court system or is there a greater solution?

The above clip is a compilation of Mr. Krabs’ greedy scenes. Read the rest of this entry »

On Monday evening, I had the pleasure of attending the Lead Dialogues with George Mason University’s President Angel Cabrera. The event took place in the Mason Hall where a select chosen few were able to discuss two readings, ‘How Much Land Does a Man Need?’ and ‘A Zen Parable: The Stawberry,’ the President himself selected. During the Lead Dialogues, the students and President Cabrera were able to read and dissect the climatic points of each reading selection and how they pertained to an overall theme or deeper meaning to life. The President facilitated the discussion by posing questions to the student group and asking their perception about the readings and each passage in correlation with leadership. It was interesting to see each student become more comfortable in front of the President and unwind their past and current leadership or cultural life experiences as to how the student answered the question or provided insight. At the end of the discussion, President Cabrera provided an explanation as to why each reading selection was chosen. He also used statistics from research conducted by the great Nobel Peace Prize winner Daniel Kahneman in relation to each reading, and how these statistics impacted the way we should we thinking about leadership and our daily lives. Overall, I took away a “mindful” meaning from the conversation with President Cabrera which enhances my opinion and future insight about leadership. President Cabrera expressed great concern about how we should all look at life with a deeper appreciation and consider the true meaning of our goals and life objectives for the present and future.

What is your “mindful” thought about life? Do you think all we do in life is work for certain goals that pertain to our age range for nothing? Or, do you think there is a deeper meaning in life- Do we constantly work to improve society, or do we constantly work to gain self-fulfillment?