Marijuana Smoking Etiquette

Marijuana Smoking Etiquette

Fri, Oct 16, 2009

Marijuana 101, Tips

Are you new to cannabis use? Learn the marijuana smoking etiquette that applies to a worldwide culture.
1. The person who rolls the joint (no matter whose weed it is) gets to spark up the joint and get first hit.
2. If someone rolls a nice joint, it’s good to give the person a complement on his rolling skills.
3. If someone starts bogarting the bowl and starts using the excuse that it’s okay for him to Bogart it since it’s his weed; this is definitely not cool. The punishment depends on the quality of the weed and how much he put in. (if it was real crappy and he was real cheap with it, then you bug on the person and rag on him).
4. If someone is too palsy to light the bowl (due to being too stoned or the person is just a retard) then they must relinquish control of the lighter to someone more able to get it lit. This does NOT mean the person who lights gets free hits… this privilege tends to get abused (”hey lemme light it for you.”)
5. If someone is so much of a palsy that they blow INTO the pipe/joint and blow all the shit on the floor, this person must be ragged on and the person can’t smoke on the next round (unless it was his stuff)
6. If you smoke with someone in your house, you should let him or her eat some munchies you may have lying around… don’t be cheap with your food, if you have any.
7. If someone who’s smoked asks for a sip of your soda, you must give him some, (cotton mouth is not fun).
8. Converse of #7: if you ask for a sip, don’t take a large gulp.
9. If smoking from a joint, never put the whole thing in your mouth and get it all sopping wet. It is disgusting and it messes up the joint.
10. If you’re smoking from a bong and there is not enough in the bowl for a whole other hit, you should save the smoke in the chamber for the next person. (Don’t let go of the rushhold or ‘carb’ and take it all yourself)
11. Never bogart
12. Never bitch about someone else’s weed being no good. If you don’t like it don’t smoke it!
13. If a friend gets you high sometime in the future you need to get that friend high
14. Thou shall not turn down a smoke. Ever!
15. Phrased in the form of a narrative: My buddy and I are sitting around smoking the weed that I just scored. After flaming-up, and taking a few moderate puffs, I pass it on. The sounds that follow can only be described as vacuum-like. After a couple of huge, lung-busting tokes, the guy passes back the remnants of something that could have, at some point, been a joint. If it’s not completely “canoed”, then it’s absolutely soaked. I not so subtly drop that old Cheech & Chong line “Hey man, can I wring it out for you?” He just looks at me.
16. I have noticed the following: After smoking-up, the odd “crass-monkey” some people will actually eat the stained, disgusting roach. This must be because they want that “extra bit” of oil, resin, or whatever is left on the paper. This situation can be compared to the patron of a good restaurant picking up his “as good as empty” plate and licking off the remaining morsels of food. Sure he got that little pool of gravy, but was it really worth it?
17. If you buy weed from a friend or a friend of a friend, it is polite to roll a joint, (a small one, if you wish) and smoke with the person who sells you the stuff.
18. It is very impolite to hand someone an empty bowl, without notifying that person of its possible cashed-ness. A proper warning would be ‘Here ya go. I think it might be cashed.
19. The person who fills the bowl is given the opportunity to take the first hit. It doesn’t matter whose weed it is.
20. Always remember to thank a person who has gotten you high. I know it sounds silly, but I know people who never say thanks and it gets a little annoying.
21. The person who brought the bud picks the music.
22. When using a bong, DON’T blow out the ashes, unless that’s what the “homeowner” does.
23. NEVER go to someone’s house EXPECTING him or her to catch you a buzz. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule…
24. If you spill the bong, clean it up! (And don’t forget to put water back in!)
25. When the roach gets too small, if someone has a problem with it, it is common courtesy here to put the roach in a bowl and finish it that way. That way the people who don’t mind burning their fingers don’t get it all.
26. Thou shall not roll pinners.
********************************************************************************
The first step to legalize marijuana in California could happen Tuesday.

Lawmakers will vote on Assembly Bill 390 -- legislation to tax and regulate marijuana. The assembly's Public Safety Committee is expected to vote after a hearing that begins at 9 a.m. hearing.

The bill, authored by San Francisco Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, would essentially treat pot the same way alcohol is treated under the law and would allow adults over 21 to possess, smoke and grow marijuana.

The law would also call for a fee of $50 per ounce sold and would help fund drug eradication and awareness programs. It could help pull California out of debt, supporters say, raising up to $990 million from the fees.

This is the first time in U.S. history any state legislative body has ever considered repealing marijuana prohibition, which has been in place since 1913.

Link to Ticker Forum

Richter TNT for Seismic Example Magnitude Energy Yield (approximate)

Earthquake Severity

Richter Earthquake
Magnitudes Effects

Less than 3.5 Generally not felt, but recorded.

3.5-5.4 Often felt, but rarely causes damage.

Under 6.0 At most slight damage to well-designed buildings.
Can cause major damage to poorly constructed buildings
over small regions.

6.1-6.9 Can be destructive in areas up to about 100 kilometers
across where people live.

7.0-7.9 Major earthquake. Can cause serious damage over larger areas.

8 or greater Great earthquake. Can cause serious damage in areas several
hundred kilometers across.
******************************************************

Richter TNT for Seismic Example
Magnitude Energy Yield (approximate)

-1.5     6 ounces Breaking a rock on a lab table
1.0      30 pounds Large Blast at a Construction Site
1.5      320 pounds
2.0      1 ton Large Quarry or Mine Blast
2.5     4.6 tons
3.0     29 tons
3.5     73 tons
4.0     1,000 tons Small Nuclear Weapon
4.5     5,100 tons Average Tornado (total energy)
5.0     32,000 tons
5.5     80,000 tons Little Skull Mtn., NV Quake, 1992
6.0     1 million tons Double Spring Flat, NV Quake, 1994
6.5     5 million tons Northridge, CA Quake, 1994
7.0     32 million tons Hyogo-Ken Nanbu, Japan Quake, 1995; Largest Thermonuclear Weapon
7.5    160 million tons Landers, CA Quake, 1992
8.0    1 billion tons San Francisco, CA Quake, 1906
8.5    5 billion tons Anchorage, AK Quake, 1964
9.0    32 billion tons Chilean Quake, 1960
10.0  1 trillion tons (San-Andreas type fault circling Earth)
12.0  160 trillion tons (Fault Earth in half through center,
OR Earth's daily receipt of solar energy)

*************************************************************************

Slave Boy & Vicious Mistress - XXX

Vicious mistress jerks horny cocks of her slave

My Maid...F70 - XXX

Who needs marriage when the maid will do? God, who is going to smote this one?

smite

45 up, 11 down

buy smite mugs, tshirts and magnets A term used when murder is just not enough. Get away from me or I will smite you. Katy Perry's new twitter icon pic today after this blog post. "dazedandconfused" was the caption katyperry   #didyouknow that peacocks almost make the same noise as cats! They meow like crazy! Katy Perry's tweet from about 11AM EST Jan. 4, 2010 http://twitpic.com/xzilo - Art... speaking my language. 7:49 PM Jan 13th from TwitPic Retweeted by you and 100+ others

Gov. Tim Pawlenty vowed to appeal a ruling that challenged unilateral budget cuts

Judge Gearin "has inserted herself into a political dispute," the governor said. Her ruling could spur more lawsuits.
By BAIRD HELGESON and PAT DOYLE, Star Tribune staff writers
Last update: December 31, 2009 - 11:43 PM
Saying a judge overreached and misinterpreted the law, Gov. Tim Pawlenty vowed Thursday that he will appeal a ruling that challenged unilateral budget cuts he imposed last summer.
But the Republican governor, who garnered praise from conservatives for outmaneuvering DFL lawmakers when he made the cuts, also said he's willing to return to the bargaining table with them.
Ramsey County District Court Judge Kathleen Gearin "has inserted herself into a political dispute," Pawlenty said at a news conference. "That degree of involvement by the court is concerning, to say the least. We believe the judge misapplied and misinterpreted the statute in significant ways."
However, an expert on Minnesota constitutional law said Gearin made "a good argument" in declaring that Pawlenty overstepped his authority in cutting the budget on his own.
University of Minnesota law Prof. Fred Morrison also defended the judge's role. "It's a highly political issue before the court, but that doesn't mean that it isn't a legal issue," he said. "A judge has a duty to rule on a legal complaint."
Gearin ruled on a lawsuit by recipients of a low-income nutrition program, whose funding Pawlenty cut using a power called unallotment.
She ordered $5.3 million in funding for the program reinstated pending a hearing in March.
Pawlenty's news conference Thursday was his first detailed response to Wednesday's ruling that he "trod upon the constitutional power of the Legislature" last summer when he cut $2.7 billion from the budget.
Pawlenty said he used the power properly, noting that the state faces its worst financial hardship since World War II. "If we can't use unallotment now, I don't know when we could," he said.
Pawlenty, who is exploring a run for president, also used the news conference to blame the DFL-controlled Legislature, which he accused of not working in good faith to solve the looming budget shortfall last spring.
The governor said he was open to holding a special session if an agreement can be reached during January to deal with part of the projected deficit. He raised the possibility of making more unilateral cuts if no agreement can be reached.
One former DFL senator who is running for governor said odds are slim that legislators and Pawlenty will broker an out-of-court deal to erase the $1.2 billion deficit projected for 2010-11.
"If the governor agreed to a tax increase, it would essentially be the end of his presidential campaign, since his claim to fame is his fiscal austerity," said former Sen. Steve Kelley of Hopkins. As for legislators from his own party, "it's going to be awfully tough for them to agree to cuts affecting key constituencies of the DFL," such as spending on health care and education.
After the 2009 legislative session, Pawlenty vetoed a revenue bill and then used his executive power to trim spending -- and the nutrition program.
Gearin wrote that unallotment power "is not meant to be used as a weapon by the executive branch to break a stalemate" with the Legislature.
"It is, as the judge says, a classic separation-of-powers case," remarked Morrison.
Gearin noted that a state appeals court in 2004 upheld as constitutional Pawlenty's power to unilaterally cut spending during an earlier round of unallotment.
But she said the appeals court ruling applied to different circumstances -- emergency action to deal with a previously unforeseen budget crisis. In contrast, she said, the 2009 budget crisis was apparent months before the governor made the cuts, and he crossed the line in making the cuts unilaterally.
"I think she has a good argument," said Morrison, but added, "I think she is, in a sense, pulling the punches."
Morrison said that's because the appeals court decision could be reversed on grounds that the language in the unallotment statute is unclear. The state Supreme Court, he said, could rule that Pawlenty has interpreted the statute overly broadly, giving himself power to effectively abolish programs.
Meanwhile, Pawlenty's administration must figure out how to start funding the nutrition program, which pays for special diets for ailing low-income Minnesotans. Gearin's ruling reinstating the $5.3 million for the program includes back payments to November, when Pawlenty cut the money.
"We're still working out the details for implementing the court's decision," said state budget director Jim Schowalter.
More lawsuits possible
Gearin's ruling on the nutrition program could spur other agencies or groups to file suit to get their money restored.
The board of the League of Minnesota Cities plans to meet this month to discuss whether to file a suit to restore the $128 million in aid the governor cut to cities for 2010.
But even if the cities were to get the money back, it would likely be temporary because the state still faces a major shortfall, said Gary Carlson, a lobbyist for the group.
The nutrition program case is not the only lawsuit targeting the governor's unilateral cuts. A separate Ramsey County suit is challenging his decision to cut a state program that provides a tax refund for donors to major political party candidates.
Pawlenty denied Thursday that he was using his solo budget-cutting authority to fortify his reputation as a fiscal conservative as he tests a run for president. He said his career has been defined by his belief in lower taxes and smaller government.
"This is not some new concoction that emerged in the last six months," he said.

California - Judge rules furloughs illegal

Judge rules furloughs illegal for prison guards
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch rules that the governor's furlough order violates state law. He orders the state to pay prison workers for unpaid hours worked.

By Shane Goldmacher

December 18, 2009

Reporting from Sacramento
Click here to find out more!

A state judge on Thursday struck down Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's furloughs of correctional officers, who have been working on furlough days and banking the unpaid time off.

Judge Frank Roesch of Alameda County Superior Court ruled that the governor's furlough order violated state law. He ordered the state to pay the prison workers for the unpaid hours they have worked.

To save money, Schwarzenegger last summer began furloughing for three days a month nearly every category of state worker.

"We're gratified by the affirmation of the court that the governor was violating wage and hour laws," said Lance Corcoran, a spokesman for the California Correctional Peace Officers Assn., which filed the lawsuit. "In essence, you can't expect people to work for free."

Furlough days are not supposed to be cashed out; workers were ordered to take the days off before June 2012.

An October report from the state Senate said workers in the prison system had banked 1.5 million unused furlough hours in the first seven months of the program. Those hours are worth $52 million at the current pay rate for prison guards. Correctional workers had also accrued 1 million hours of unused vacation through August.

Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Rachel Arrezola said the administration would appeal the judge's decision.

"The governor does not believe that state workers should be shielded from the same economic realities that every California family and business is facing," she said.

Thursday's ruling was not the first legal setback for the Schwarzenegger administration over the issue of furloughs.

A San Francisco Superior Court judge ruled earlier this year that workers at the State Compensation Insurance Fund should be exempt from the order. Judge Charlotte Walter Woolard said those workers were due back pay plus interest.

Three other challenges to the furloughs are pending in Alameda County Superior Court. Roesch is the presiding judge in each case.
************************************************************************

Judge orders the governor to halt employee furloughs
December 31, 2009 | 6:14 pm

A Superior Court judge today ordered Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to halt thrice-monthly furloughs for tens of thousands of state workers, saying the administration overstepped its authority in approving the unpaid days off.

A spokesman for Schwarzenegger said the governor would appeal the decision of Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch in favor of three state employee unions, including the Service Employees International Union Local 1000. The unions had filed suit after the governor began the furloughs in February in response to a multibillion-dollar budget shortfall.

The judge ruled that the governor’s use of the state Emergency Services Act to furlough state workers because the state did not have a budget at the time had limits.

“...The emergency necessitating them was the failure of the Legislature to pass the budgets, though the reach of the orders extended long after those budgets were subsequently passed and signed into law," the judge wrote.

Roesch also ruled that furloughing state employees who are paid from special funds illegally interferes with the operation of specially funded agencies.

He said the governor’s use of furloughs was an “abuse of discretion” and that he “violated a mandatory duty to take into account the agencies varying needs before reducing workplace hours.”

The governor plans to appeal Roesch’s decision and noted that the order blocking the furloughs would be stayed until the appeal is ruled on, said Aaron McLear, a spokesman for Schwarzenegger.

“Ultimately this will be decided by the state Supreme Court,” McLear said. “The governor absolutely has the authority to issue furloughs and we feel the state Supreme Court will rule in our favor.”

The lawsuit also was filed by CASE (California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges, and Hearing Officers in State Employment) and the Union of American Physicians and Dentists.

--Patrick McGreevy

China demotes editor after Obama interview: sources

China demotes editor after Obama interview: sources
Chris Buckley
BEIJING
Sun Dec 13, 2009 2:35am EST

BEIJING (Reuters) - The top editor of a Chinese newspaper that interviewed U.S. President Barack Obama has been demoted, sources said, in a move they described as fallout from Communist Party censors' anger over its handling of the story.

World

Xiang Xi, the top editor of the Southern Weekend weekly newspaper who interviewed Obama during his visit to China in mid-November, has been named as "executive" editor-in-chief and placed under a new top editor this week after pressure from the ruling Communist Party's propaganda department, said three employees of the paper.

They all requested anonymity, saying they feared punishment for speaking about the move, which has also been discussed on Chinese-language Internet sites.

Xiang's demotion could revive debate in Washington about the impact of Obama's visit. It underscored the contention between Washington and Beijing over censorship and access during Obama's visit, when U.S. officials' pressed for opportunities for him to speak directly to the Chinese public.

"The propaganda department was certainly unhappy about the interview," said Michael Anti, a Chinese blogger and media commentator based in Beijing who follows censorship.

"Xiang Xi was de facto top editor at the South Weekend and in effective he has been shifted from number one to number two....This could be a way to stave off more pressure from above."

Anti and one source at the paper said Xiang's formal title may not have changed, but the appointment of a new superior transferred from a paper, the Southern Daily, more trusted by the Party was a slap for Southern Weekend.

Xiang could not be contacted for comment.

The paper (www.infzm.com) is one of China's most popular and combative newspapers, featuring investigative reports on social problems and official corruption and misdeeds.

Like all Chinese media, the Southern Weekend comes under state control and censorship, but it is based in the far southern province of Guangdong, which has gone further than other parts of the country in allowing adventurous reporting.

Obama chose to hold his keynote interview in China with the paper, and not, as many visiting leaders do, tightly controlled state television. (link.reuters.com/wup56g)

Reporters at the paper believed Xiang was moved to placate the powerful Party propaganda department, incensed that the interview with Obama was initiated without its approval, said an editor from a magazine who said he was told of the development by senior staff at the paper. He also requested anonymity.

"OPENING A BLANK WINDOW"

The interview had been requested by the White House and approved by China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which then went directly to the paper to arrange it, he said.

But when propaganda department officials learned about the planned interview they criticized the paper, took a heavy hand in restricting questions and slashed the transcript approved for publication hours before it went to press, said the editor from another publication.

Only a brief, bland selection appeared on November 19, and other Chinese media were told by censors not to republish even that, said the editor and a reporter at another Chinese paper.

But Southern Weekend editors gave over both the bottom halves of the two pages on which the cut interview appeared to ads for the paper featuring conspicuously large fields of blank space -- a gesture some readers saw as a hint of censorship.

"Everyone in the Chinese media knows about the tradition of opening a blank window (kai tian chuang), leaving a big blank space on a page to indicate that something has been censored," said the editor from another publication. "Whether that was the intention of the ad, it was certainly read that way."

The tradition of "opening a blank window" to protest against censorship was used by the Communist Party-controlled press and other opponents of authoritarian Nationalist rule in China before 1949 and has continued sporadically under Communist Party rule.

The editor from the other publication said censors also told the Southern Weekend not to print a picture of a note that Obama wrote for the paper, speaking of the importance of a free press.

Richard Buangan, a spokesman for the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, said the White House had requested that the Southern Weekend interview Obama, but could give no more details.

During his visit to China, Obama prodded the host government on censorship and human rights. But Beijing showed no signs of giving ground, and did not allow questions from reporters during the joint press appearance by Obama and President Hu Jintao.

The U.S. President also held a "townhall" meeting with students in Shanghai, which U.S. officials pressed to be broadcast live nationwide. [ID:nPEK108931] In the end, however, Chinese officials restricted live television viewing to Shanghai itself.

(Editing by Ken Wills and Alex Richardson)