Take This Procrastination Quiz Right Now

If you don’t take this procrastination quiz right now, you’ll never get to it. Which is okay, but if you’re curious to see how you stack up against other procrastinators, you need to take the quiz to find out. I’m pretty bad - in the top 10%. When I have a deadline, I get it done on time pretty much every time. But if I don’t have a deadline, I tend to stall. And because I set my own work schedule, that means I’m a lot less productive than I should be. I’m taking measures to stop that, but these tips were helpful reminders of why I do my bible study and exercise first thing in the morning - if I didn’t do them then, I wouldn’t do them at all.

The funny thing about that is once I get started, I really enjoy those activities. It’s like jumping into a cold swimming pool - the first few minutes are rough, but after that, it’s great.

I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate.
(Romans 7:15)

h/t John Tierney

---

Your score is 80 out of a possible 100

Usually a Procrastinator

You rank in the top 10% in terms of procrastination. That is, when it comes to putting things off, you often do so even though you know you shouldn’t. Likely, you are much more free-spirited, adventurous, and spontaneous than most. Probably, your work doesn’t engage you as much as you would like or perhaps you are surrounded by many easily available and much more pleasant temptations. These temptations may initially seem rewarding, but in the longer-term, you see many of them as time-wasters. Though you are likely incredibly productive just before a deadline, you might not get all your work done and there is a lot of unwanted stress. You may want to reduce what procrastination you do commit. If so, here are three tips that have been shown to work:

Goal Setting

This is one of the most established ways of moving forward on your plans. Take any project you are presently procrastinating and break it down into individual steps. Each of these steps should have the following three aspects. First, they should be somewhat challenging though achievable for you. It is more satisfying to accomplish a challenge. Second, they should be proximal, that is you can achieve them fairly soon, preferable today or over the next few days. Third, they should be specific, that is you know exactly when you have accomplished them. If you can visualize in your mind what you should do, even better.

Stimulus Control

This method has also been well tested and is very successful. What you need is a single place that you do your work and nothing else. Essentially, you need an office, though many students have a favorite desk at a library. For stimulus control to work best, the office or desk should be free of any signs of temptation or easily available distractions that might pull you away (e.g., no games, no chit-chat, no web-surfing). If you need a break, that is fine, but make sure you have it someplace at least a few minutes distant, preferably outside of the building itself. If you are unwilling to take the time to get there, acknowledge that you likely don’t need the break.

Routines

Routines are difficult to get into but in the end, this is often our aim. Things are much easier to do when we get into a habit of them, whether it is work, exercise, or errands. If you schedule some of those tasks you are presently procrastinating upon so that they occur on a regular schedule, they become easier. Start your routine slowly, something to which you can easily commit. Eventually, like brushing your teeth, it will likely become something you just do, not taking much effort at all. At this point, you might add to your routine, again always keeping your overall level of effort at a moderate to low level. Importantly, when you fall off your routine, inevitable with sickness or the unexpected, get back on it as soon as possible. Your routine gets stronger every time your follow it. It also gets weaker every time you don’t.

Princess Cruise Lines Robs Elderly Lady of Lifelong Dream

I’ve tried about five different titles, seeking one over-the-top and dramatic enough to satisfy my sense of outrage. This one doesn’t, but I can’t think of anything better.

A 78 year old woman, living on a Social Security pension, saved for ten years to go on her dream cruise. She relied on Princess Cruise Lines for all her travel arrangements, including air travel. Some nitwit probably earning slightly more than minimum wage booked two elderly women with an itinerary which included three connecting flights, each way. What could go wrong? Mercifully, neither of these ladies broke a hip trying to get themselves to their next flight, but they missed one anyway because of mechanical difficulties. They missed the flight and missed the boat.

The cost of the cruise is non-refundable. Ten years of scrimping and saving, and she only got as far as Minneapolis. Doubtless Minneapolis is beautiful, but, cold as it is, they still don’t have glaciers. Princess Cruise Lines is all about refunds, though - when they’re on the receiving end. The airlines refunded this woman’s airfare - to Princess Cruise Lines. So Princess made quite a tidy little profit on this deal.

But Princess spokeswoman Julie Benson said the woman will not get the refunds; Princess keeps the combined total of $559.80. The cruise line negotiates fares and special refund conditions with the airlines, Benson said, and the line’s policy is an industry standard :“The cancellation penalty applies to the cruise, airfare, prepaid excursions and pre- or post-cruise packages.” Because the woman hadn’t bought travel insurance (her friend did), she gets nothing back.

Now, I agree that Princess Cruise Lines has every right to behave as they have. This is why travel insurance exists, and this is why her friend bought travel insurance. But for pity’s sake, this woman is 78 years old. She’s not going to have another chance to do this.

Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should. I’m pretty confident that they don’t fill up every boat, every time, and that they could have found some place to put her on a future cruise. Sometimes rules should be broken and policies bent for the greater good - in this case, not just the moral thing, but the practical thing could have been accomplished. It would have been far better, just from a PR standpoint, to find some solution to give this woman a cruise. Justice is good; mercy is better.

It would have been far better from an economical standpoint as well. They don’t know it, but it’s cost them at least $5,000. Last month a friend of ours asked me to help him arrange an Alaska cruise for him and a buddy. He wants us to go as well, although we hadn’t decided yet. (With four of us, it’s kind of a pricey vacation. We’ve wanted to do it for some time and I can’t make up my mind if this is the time.) I have been dutifully trying to come up with the best plan for him, and had pretty much decided on the Diamond Princess because it’s so new. Holland America, Celebrity, and Carnival all have Alaska cruises, and you can bet that I’ll book it with one of them after this. (In fact, Reggie, you know I love ya but as far as I’m concerned you can swim it before I help you board a Princess Cruise.) So Princess, that’s a minimum of $5k, but leaning toward $15,000 you won’t be getting from me and mine.

I don’t know what this decision will ultimately cost Princess Cruise Lines, but I don’t believe I’m the only one who feels like they could have figured out some way to help this woman have her dream without upsetting the balance of the universe. I’ve emailed CoGo at WaPo to see if anyone is collecting donations to get this woman a cruise; if they are I’ll update this post with the information.

h/t to Cheerful Iconoclast, who points out, ‘I have to say that if I were a competitor of Princess Cruises, I’d give the old lady a free cruise to Alaska. Then I’d have her tape a commercial saying “Princess Cruise Lines screwed me out of my money, but Cheerful Iconoclast Cruises treated me like a queen!”‘ They won’t make that commercial because they almost certainly have the same policies, but hopefully they have someone more astute making decisions who’d like to enjoy some great PR and that warm, fuzzy, ‘I did a good deed today’ feeling.

Por que no te callas, US-style.

Several classic smackdowns in defense of the USA here, but this is my favorite. ‘When in England at a large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush. He answered by saying, “Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return.” It became very quiet in the room.‘ I’ve been a Powell fan since I read his bio ten years ago, in spite of the fact that we don’t have much in common politically.

Hardball

Army Funding Shortage - The Army has announced initial steps in planning for reduced operations at all Army bases while Congress continues to debate funding for the global war on terror.

This sort of thing didn’t work out so well for Newt Gingrinch. Even with a sympathetic media, the Dems are going to take a hard hit for this if it actually happens.

Trent Lott Resigns

“See, you don’t have to wait for a public disgrace before quitting. You can do it two, or even three weeks before.”

That’s the Onion, but the best humor always has at least a kernel of truth. If it’s related to Katrina litigation, I hope they can nail him for something related to his State Farm shenanigans.

TNR, take note - this is how it’s done.

This is an appropriate response when one of your reporters is caught making up wild stories:

Journalist fabricated claim that his family was massacred - “Reporters Without Borders is astounded and angry to discover that a journalist’s claim that 11 of his close relatives were murdered last weekend is false. Amman-based Iraqi journalist Dia al-Kawwaz had claimed on 26 November that 11 members of his immediate family were shot by gunmen the previous day in Baghdad.”

Gateway Pundit and Hot Air have more on this story.

Yeah! What Slu Said!

I don’t have anything to add to Slublog’s post over at Ace about why he can’t support Mike Huckabee for President, but I will second it. I have several friends who say Huck is the only candidate Christians can vote for with a clear conscience. I think that’s ridiculous. Slu addresses Huckabee’s fiscal record, view of government power, and political temperament, and perfectly frames the concerns many of us have. (emphasis added)

Gov. Mike Huckabee Thursday denounced a bill by Sen. Jim Holt that would deny state benefits to illegal immigrants as un-Christian, un-American, irresponsible and anti-life.

I find that bothersome. Consider what he did there: Huckabee made agreement with him on a particular policy a litmus test for what constitutes a good or a bad Christian. This offends me because my faith is more than a set of political yardsticks or a way to institute “social justice.”

Faith should not be a bludgeon used to beat your political opponents into silence. Huckabee’s willingness to use it as such is disturbing. Disagreement does not equal heresy - accusing those who disagree with us of being less devoted to Christ is wrong. Simply wrong. Political issues are not theological ones.

This is an important point. Jesus told us to take care of the poor, not the government. Christians are not called to save the culture, but to point people in a culture to Christ. Our call is not political. This doesn’t mean we should stay out of politics entirely, but I believe it does mean that we shouldn’t allow politics to obscure the most important mission we’ve been given - to tell people about Christ. (Bet you never thought you’d see those words at this blog, huh?)

Go read it all. (And, no, that last paragraph is not something I ever expected to read at AOSHQ. )

Sermon Series: Gospel of John, John’s Introduction

Here is the third sermon in the Gospel of John series, and here are the sermon notes.

The two previous sermons were prepatory - this one begins with how John chose to start off his gospel. It covers the “table of contents,” vocabulary, and key concepts - it’s a great kickoff. I’ve really been enjoying getting back to the basics. When I was first saved, I read John repeatedly, and ended up writing out a three page, single spaced list of questions that my pastor at the time was kind enough to sit down with me and answer. In spite of that, I’m learning far more from this series than I expected. Like onions, like Shrek, like parfait… John has layers. Dig in and enjoy!

[display_podcast]

Next Page »