johnp

Well, I know what incoming looks like. Even worse, what it sounds like. Still.... I don't necessarily think Presidents should have to serve 4 years. It might help them, but there are lots of cases where it wouldn't either. I think the requirement would end up with bluebloods and billionaire string-pullers (who do you think REALLY decides who we get to choose from? ) working a "pipeline" of sorts for their favored candidates which would expose them to ONLY enough to brag in their campaign ads. I would like for candidates to attend a school or *something* that teaches them what the armed forces are really about instead of the establishment BS they've been spoonfed at (insert name of Ivy League school here) by professors who've never served and base their instruction on still others, who also have not served. It's the blind men in the house trying to describe the elephant. Unfortunately, they are in the position of having to seem to know everything...so things go downhill and their students become misinformed. It doesn't stop after school. Look how many politicians (regardless of your standing on it) protested Arizona's new controversial law...but then admitted they hadn't actually bothered to *read* it. Same with Politicians and their stolen valor. They tell us stories based on what they think we want to hear, based on what they've heard from someone else. No wonder some people think we go over and wholesale slaughter everything moving. Truth is I've been shot at quite a few times and only once have I been in a position where I would be allowed to fire back. ROE are far more strict in real life than in the movies. It is shocking the assumptions I've heard leveled at me or the armed forces in general by people who were presumably more educated than I. Just because you can quote Aristotle doesn't mean you know much about my job. Here's my opinion (on some things) Kind of a rant, so skip to the end if you want to ignore me venting. Kerry-globalist. never had a chance, simply because he was a traitor. He has been recorded testifying to Congress that he had witnessed all manner of things which, honestly, I don't think he did, (otherwise as the LT he was in charge and therefore, if it had happened it was HIS RESPONSIBILITY to discipline those responsible....he apparently did not) meanwhile the recording was used by Vietnamese forces before all of ours had even come home. Gore-globalist. a simple opportunist. His theories about global warming have made him a LOOOOOT of Money, with his corporation selling "carbon credits". His ties with the UN political entities ensured them that they would be able to tax us simply for how much we breathe (CO2 anyone) and suddenly dissenting scientists need not apply for funding. No surprise suddenly so many UN scientists believed in [man caused] global warming. When the emails got leaked that the scientists were "fixing" the data to support what they were telling us....instead of finding out how much was BS, our government instead wanted to seek out the people who hacked the emails....even with the fraud exposed, Gore and the UN are moving forward with the global tax on CO2... Bush-terrible public speaker. Didn't lie about his service. National Guard-doesn't mean no risk. I've seen National Guard troops stuck in Iraq every time I've been there. They can die too, not just on their one weekend a month (peacetime hours....). Too much of a Globalist. Clinton-Globalist. DID give up OBL opportunities more than once. One of the 3 crookedest Presidents in my lifetime (IMHO). Shrank armed forces pitifully small, inviting OBL himself to say we had become a paper tiger...demonstrated unwillingness to support our interests for any reason....(Americans dragged through streets of Mogadishu-his response: deny use of armor, and withdraw) GAVE entire US Patent database to CHINA. Also signed on to give China all patent submissions. No wonder China keeps beating us at the technology game these days....signed orders allowing US Technology to be given/sold to the Chinese. This includes the super quiet screws (propellers) on our nuclear submarines, as well as missile guidance technology. China, who before Clinton could barely field a souped up SCUD...has now successfully shot down SATELLITES. A US city would be a much easier target. Finally, he honored Pres. Carter's unratified agreement to turn the Panama canal back over to Panama. It was built by Americans, was US territory, and Panama had no means to run it. Surprise surprise, it is now run by a Chinese company and Panama is full of Chinese troops. Yet, everyone is meant to believe he got in trouble for a stain on a dress. I couldn't give a @#$ about the dress. The other stuff is what troubles me. Iraq. Yeah, there's oil. No, we're not getting it. Bugs me that everyone seems to like saying "see, there weren't any WMD's". That's like telling a meth lab they're about to be raided a week in advance, and then when the police kick in the door, yelling "Pigs! those are just innocent poor people, no METH lab!". Not sure what others have seen but I've seen fueled missiles next to railroad cars full of gas masks and atropine (2003) doesn't mean he had anything still...but my thinking is you don't put on a condom unless you intend to use it. I'm convinced there was lots of ChemBio stuff around. Not sure about Nuclear but his own scientists believed he did, and the UN inspectors were conveniently forbidden from making surprise inspection *anywhere*. It would have surprised me if they HAD found anything. So the "Bush lied" bit doesn't fly, at least in Iraq. As I recall all Saddam had to do was open everything up to the inspectors. He refused. It didn't go well for him. The idea that everything was a "lie" I think has more to do with it being during an election year and Democrats (and some Republicans) needed a way to make the war seem distasteful so they could beat out the current occupants of various political offices. Which they did. Now it's their turn to be the "bumbling incumbents" and they're squirming now that the microscope is on them for a change. Mr. Obama-HUGE Globalist...(is this guy even American? did much of his campaign "apologizing" for America in other countries) doing quite a bit to negate our national sovereignty (IMHO) and quite a bit more to negate our Constitution. More unratified treaties with Russia, for instance. Treaties with the UN about gun control which are supposed to supersede our own national law. Taking over private corporations. Unelected "czars" in charge of everything. Spent well over a million US in attorney fees to keep the state of Hawaii from releasing his actual birth records (as opposed to the one that can be sent in for by mail, which is openly displayed elsewhere online). McCain. Globalist. Sell out. IMHO was run against Obama by someone else pulling the strings, simply to insure Obama won. Shocking that even with McCain's lukewarm campaign, that Obama barely beat him, even after Obama spent more than any campaign in history on media, etc. Obama should have trounced him soundly. Being a POW for so long has to have an effect on someone and IMHO doesn't qualify you to lead a country. Demonstrated successful leadership, however, be it in warfare or in a peacetime discipline like a major corporation, combined with *genuine* patriotism are what I look for. Sorry for the rant folks. Just had to vent. I don't think you need to serve to be a good president. I do think you need to be educated-by the services-on what they really do, how they do it, and how best to utilize them, however.

Stuie, Good on you for making the commitment to drop the pounds. It's hard work. It's not a diet or a cure all or anything, but something that works for me every time I try it... (I unfortunately am one of those who gets where I want to be then blows it all, then turns around and has to play catch up) is simply to work out every day. It doesn't have to be extremely difficult or anything, but it had better be almost like a religion. Take a walk, take a jog, etc etc. and then be mindful of what you eat. Eat what you want, but everything comes with a price. Read the label and consider if you really want to do that to yourself. Sometimes the answer is yes, sometimes no. Dr Pepper? love the stuff-but once you start working out harder and harder your body will actually start to loathe the unhealthy choices in your diet. I'm not kidding. While in one of the schools leading up to my job I lost 36 lbs in 4 weeks, all from PT (I was eating like a horse, so diet wasn't it....) but more importantly noticed that I started craving only the healthier things (bananas, etc) and that even the smell of the greasy breakfast biscuits I formerly preferred would make me sick... Most people don't have 10 hours a day to work out, not me for sure...but doing anything at all that is an intentional workout daily is a huge step. Mostly though, just do SOMETHING every day, drink your water, pay attention to your diet and you're already on the right track. Time for me to jump back on the track myself. I do work out, but I've been slacking lately and it's catching up to me.

I'm a complete mutt. American 100% which, for me, means...... Polish, Irish, English, German, Crow, Blackfoot (Native American tribes) and probably more if one went far enough back.

Well...if you're looking to travel light, I'd say go with the HoboNargile and make sure you have at least one glass bottle or fairly heavy duty plastic bottle available. The thing packs small and seems to work with just about every bottle I've tried. Just be careful with flimsier plastic bottles, as the top seems to shake back and forth a good bit. You may want to bury the base or put it in something to secure it.... I traveled with an acrylic before too, and that also works, but it all comes down to what you want to stuff in your pack. With the Hobo, if you break your base-you just grab another bottle. The acrylic-not that you're going to break it, but-if the base breaks, you're done. There are other options too, of course.

I used to love Sultan Rose and even more, Sultan Raspberry. I've come to realize since joining the forums that Sultan is no longer available(?) Not sure they were "bad" per se, but just kind of bummed. (I live in a dry hole for hookah tobacco these days...although I'm finding more stuff and have some of Eric's Tangiers Cocoa on the way to try...mmm)

[quote name='INCUBUSRATM' date='08 February 2010 - 09:59 AM' timestamp='1265641187' post='450382'] [quote name='lumpypoptarts' date='08 February 2010 - 01:31 AM' timestamp='1265614302' post='450305'] That fact that she was even nominated for vp doesn't make sense. I dont understand how someone can be in that position knowing less than the average person about the USA. [/quote] Well, she was a last ditch effort by the Republican party to gain popularity.... They said, "Oh shit, the Dems have a black guy... We need a woman VP!" They realized that people were ready to have either a black man for president or a woman for president, so they knew that made Obama's "Change" campaign even more attractive. Palin was their effort to throw something new into the mix as well... For example, I had several friends who voted for McCain just because of this: "I think I'd rather have a woman VP before we have a black president..." I tell you, racism and sexism still runs rampant... This is my philosophy now: Don't look at if they're a woman or a man, black or white, or if they're a Republican or Democrat... See where they personally stand on the issues that matter to you, and vote for them based on that. The party-bias crap is getting really out of hand, if you ask me... I liked how Obama talked about that at the Republican's Retreat... Also, Republican's wanted to gain senior citizens' votes by having the old white guy to vote for... Also, I think it's safe to say that most old white people would also prefer a woman VP over a black president... I know my grandparents were like that, and all their friends... They say they're not racist, but they don't act like it... Guess it's just because they're old and "from the old days." EDIT: If you can't tell, I'm not too crazy about the Republicans... But my feeling on Dems is they don't really have backbones. Once they grow backbones and show the Repubs a thing or two, then we'll be in business. [/quote] Just thought I'd point out, the Dem's weren't the only ones with "a black guy", and for what it's worth, Obama shares no solidarity with people whose ancestors endured slavery here under the good old red white and blue-his entire U.S. ancestry is white. While I think Palin might would be electable what is frightening is whether she would just be more big government/globalist just like Obama or Bush (both of them) or Clinton. Also take care when blaming everything on Bush-it is true the downturn (which was inevitable perhaps) began under his watch, but it is equally true that it did not start until 2006-which is precisely when the Democrats took control of Congress. He didn't make the legislation allowing much of the insanity-they did. Did he read each bill before he signed it into law? I doubt it, but then again, it has been recently demonstrated that most of the Congressmen and Senators voting on bills couldn't be bothered to read them, either... so blame Bush for what he is to blame for, but there is PLENTY of blame on the DEM side of the aisle. Pots calling Kettles black. What I fear is that our election system has been hijacked by those who own the media, etc. and trickling down, the parties themselves. Bush did not get re-elected because "Americans are just that stupid" but simply because the people have of late been getting (IMHO) manipulated by [someone]. They are forced by the parties (and whoever controls who they run) to choose between bad and worse these days all too often. The democrats are at fault for running a candidate who was not only boring to watch, but is remembered as a traitor by far too many voters who are still alive. So of course, voters held their noses and voted for his opponent, who at least [i]said[/i] the right things. Likewise this election. On the conservative (and I'm bunching libertarians, anti-globalists such as myself, nationalists, etc together) side, there was no candidate running. A few looked possible as contenders but then bowed out due to upper echelon politics (in the Republican party) meanwhile media coverage almost guaranteed a vote for a third party would be wasted. This same coverage treated Mr. Obama as, well, the savior from all things "Bush". Nevermind that Bush wasn't up for re-election. McCain? people in his own party won't vote for him. He has promised one thing to his constituents only to go "across the aisle" and support the views of their opponents all too often. Voters do not forget betrayal very well if they're actually paying attention. McCain was playing for the Democrat party almost as often, perhaps more often, than his own. So voters who would have voted for a conservative or at least a candidate holding views holding his own country first....simply did not vote. Polls have recently said the greater majority of Americans consider themselves to be "conservatives". If McCain were perceived as a conservative-he would have won by a landslide. Obama, in spite of having more spent on his campaign than any President in US history, still did not win by the enormous margin it follows that he should have. I believe there are other powers at play-otherwise why have we had to either choose none-of-the-above and not vote or the lesser of two evils, for quite awhile now.... bad is not the solution to just-as-bad, IMHO and in spite of how it's played in the media, the voters know it. There must be something intoxicating about the halls of power which goes to most politicians' heads... they start forgetting the citizens, and think they should rather start pleasing their opponents (in some desire of appearing magnanimous?) or even worse, citizens of other countries. I could care less if GERMANS love our president-or Russians-etc etc...so long as he is looking out for US, not seeking approval elsewhere. If he (or someday she) does this-and other nations like our President as well-such would be fine and good.

[quote name='Sonthert' date='05 February 2010 - 07:01 AM' timestamp='1265374891' post='449874'] [quote name='The 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America'] Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.[/quote] That is where the 1st Amendment says that there can be no national religion. The Supreme Court has pretty continuously upheld that it means the government can have no preference for one religion over another or religious vs. irreligious. This is commonly referred to as the separation of Church and State. It is strictly prohibited for the government to purchase Bibles because of the 1st Amendment. Or anything with religious scripture on. Including Rifle sights. The bibles given to American servicemen are donated. Nobody is saying we don't want the rifle sights. If the rifle sights were being made with quotations from the Koran, you guys would be bitching about that...that would be a big deal. Stop the hypocrisy already. Save the "This is a Christian Nation" swill too. The 1st Amendment says quite the opposite. There is no National Religion. The Supreme Court has upheld this repeatedly and even forced the States to abide by it, too... [/quote] Can't resist being contrary here, but first, don't put words in my mouth-all the references to bitching about the Koran, or "Christian Nation" etc etc were not based on any statements I have made. If there is any hypocrisy...it hasn't come from my arguments. Secondly, the entire 1st amendment reads a bit longer than one short sentence: [font="Georgia,"][quote name='The 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America']Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[/quote][/font] [font="Georgia,"] [/font] [font="Georgia,"][size="3"][size="2"]So it remains that when one looks at the entire amendment, it still does not say anywhere that there is a separation, we have simply imagined it to be there out of our own tendencies to oversimplify things. Taken literally, as long as the government doesn't establish a religion nor impede the religions of the citizens, it is in the clear. A purchase order is not the same as enacting law establishing a state religion, and if anything, the first amendment is highly likely the reason the government wasn't able to simply order the inscriptions removed. Had there been the authority of law-it would have definitely done so. Rather, it simply asked, otherwise, the manufacturer's 1st amendment rights to freedom of speech as well as free exercise of his religion would have been in question. At best, the statements were simply not politically correct and invited lawsuits by those who deemed themselves offended. Had the government been manufacturing the sights perhaps things would have been different.[/size][/size][/font] [font="Georgia,"][/font][font="Georgia,"][size="3"][size="2"]If the government can fund art exhibits where Christian icons are positioned in manners offensive (to Christians), or teach Atheist views wholesale at the exclusion of other religious views (yes, Atheism is a religion too) or perhaps those of other cultures... then the laws should be applied equally. The man makes a superior product, and inscribes for personal reasons a particular religious scripture...which is no different than any other expression of speech funded by taxpayers. I feel the same rules should apply. [/size][/size][/font] [font="Georgia,"][size="3"][size="2"]The military buys a superior weapon sight because it is superior, not because of what may or may not have been stamped on it somewhere.[/size][/size][/font] [font="Georgia,"] [/font] [font="Georgia,"][size="3"][size="2"]If the hot lead coming someone's way doesn't offend them enough, knowing something might be stamped in fine print on the weapon....surely isn't going to do worse.[/size][/size][/font] [font="Georgia,"] [/font] [font="Georgia,"][size="3"][size="2"]Of course, apparently some here believe "Republicans=Christians with guns" to which I would have to wonder, the alternative is....Pagans with slingshots? if you're a (free) citizen you can choose to own (or not to own) a gun if you so choose, but that's irrelevant to this topic.[/size][/size][/font] [font="Georgia,"][size="3"][size="2"]I don't particularly feel more ill will to an enemy shooting at me simply because he is wearing something of Islamic origin, nor do I worry about what is stamped on his sights, near the serial number. Either he will die or I will but the serial number of his weapon sight or what religious affiliation he displays are sort of a moot point, except to people here.[/size][/size][/font] [font="Georgia,"][/font][size="2"]Interesting question Eric, while I know there are Bibles and other books donated to the armed forces, how do you know the ones given out at the chaplains' offices are all donated? They all look pretty GI to me....we all got the same exact paperback version, of the entire Bible if we're lucky, and more usually, the New Testament (of the same). All have camouflaged covers, come by the crate load...and are the exact same on any US military base I've ever been to (which is a few). Pretty sure, since the armed forces are required to respect the troops' desire to practice their religions (see Amendment 1 above) that the government actually purchases these in bulk through the chaplain corps. However, they do not require anyone to attend, nor do they require anyone to take one with them...so I guess if the army required the soldier to attach the ACOG to his weapon, he could refuse to use it, and demand a substitute...I've seen one particular man in a unit I served in send the supply types all over creation because he wished not to wear leather boots....[/size] [size=2]If the manufacturer removes the markings it will be more to avoid the protests of (most likely) non-servicemembers in a litigious society who claim they are offended. [/size] [size=2] [/size] [size=2]It is just tiring that these days people have nothing better to do than find things to complain about which have absolutely nothing to do with them. Reminds me of the childhood story about too many cooks making the soup, one hates onions, the other hates potatoes, still another hates meat...until one is left with a bowl of water...[/size] [size=2] [/size] [size=2] [/size] [font="Georgia,"] [/font] [font="Georgia,"][size="3"][size="2"]anyway happy smoking, gents.[/size][/size][/font] [font="Georgia,"] [/font] [font="Georgia,"] [/font] [font="Georgia,"] [/font]

Kind of bummed I missed the meet up, ended up doing family stuff almost the whole time I was in SD (although I did manage to smoke the HN with my brother in law, he may become a hookah convert...). Guess these things happen when new babies are around. Relatives came out of the wood work. That said, 1) the HoboNargile is [u]awesome[/u]....saved me from a nearly hookah-less trip. 2) [i]This is a COMPLETELY newbie question on this board, I'm sure[/i]...but I know where Fumari is (they charged me a LOT more than 7 per bowl last time I was there, although in all fairness that was probably 5 or 6 years ago) but where is your lounge, and the other gents on here? (or which one is it...) I looked in the phone listings and apparently there's a lot of them now, but I'd only been to perhaps 4 when I lived in SD.

Glad you found a solution that worked! The rest of us arguing what sort of tobacco is in starbuzz or nakhla don't really matter so long as you've found a solution you enjoy. I do know my tubs of Starbuzz had Virginia tobacco (it's on the ingredients...) but it would just be subjecture as to what is in Nakhla. Nakhla is easier on me, but if it genuinely has less nicotine than Nakhla...wash process or no, then I will simply say I did not like it last time I tried the stuff. Grain of salt, though, as that was a few years ago. Lots can change in a few years. Nakhla has been around a LOOOONG time. When I tried Starbuzz it had been out less than a year....so perhaps I've judged it too harshly based on the favorable reactions it is receiving now...

[quote name='Codename067' date='02 February 2010 - 03:37 AM' timestamp='1265099869' post='449109'] Nakhla is made of "Weaker Egyptian Stuff". I'll take you to Egypt one day, you will smoke stuff that will drop you on the ground 10 minutes in [NOT NHT, all Hookah Tobacco related]. Moving on.. One good thing you can do is try to peel of the skin of cucumber, grab a few slices of lemon, and throw them in a cup filled with water, and drink slowly through-out the session. Works well for some people that come and have a hard time coping with the nicotine levels. [/quote] Honestly, I'd love to go there, but I still don't think the stuff in Nakhla is as strong as the Virginia stuff in Starbuzz. Not saying you couldn't find strong tobacco in Egypt, but doubt that's the stuff they use. Incidentally...the first tobacco smoked...was[ Virginia ]tobacco, and its discovery and subsequent export to the rest of the world is in large part why hookahs experienced a huge jump in popularity in the 15/1600's, and during the time period if one smoked tobacco (basically anywhere) it came from the American colonies. So...I guess if we wanted to get technical about it...Egyptian tobacco...is originally American tobacco, (all tobacco is) or a descendant of it. Never tried drinking cucumber in water (although lemon is something everyone's tried) normally I used to sit around with friends and drink the strongest coffee I could get and we'd all stay up all night talking. Perhaps hot tea would be good if you're a tea person, but same idea....

[quote name='r1v3th3ad' date='02 February 2010 - 01:30 AM' timestamp='1265092249' post='449092'] Part of the beating you would take on here is that it is a Mitsuba Mitsuba brand has been known to be junk. I know this first had, my first hookah around 4yrs ago was a two hose mitsuba(I think its in my gallery). I constantly had to make repairs to it with JB Stick because it was constantly falling apart. They are not welded together, they are glued together. All my seals went bad with a warm water rinse. The first major problem was the downstem falling off. I had to constantly repair that. The thing that killed it was that the "welds" and seals inside the heart went bad and the inside fell apart(where I could not repair it). The damn thing fell apart within 6months of owning it and I had to make repairs once a month for over two years until I got the brains to buy a quality hookah( my MZ <3). So, beware with this hookah, because chances are its going to break sometime over the next few years. Most people I knew that had a Mitsuba had the same problem as me. They are known to be cheap, low-end hookahs at a higher price. Maybe you have a rare gem, and even with the good review, I will not buy one because it is a Mitsuba. Mitsubas are crap/junk My opinion is backed on this one I think [/quote] Good info to know about the brand. This particular one is all steel, with parts threading together (except the hose-it has an O-ring seal and plugs into the side of the hookah, and there is a captive plug for when the hose is not connected. The hookah portion is basically a can similar to a flattened canteen, with a hole threaded with a purge valve, a large central hole for the stem/head to thread into, and of course the lid/secondary windscreen. The bowl itself also has a self contained cover, much like similar bowls sold elsewhere, which clasps down over the coal and screen once lit. It's utilitarian, but there's no glue (with the exception of the bowl, which is affixed to the threaded metal fitting which allows it to be attached to the hookah). The thing is no kidding almost all metal and threaded fittings. However it's good to know their regular hookahs suffer in quality, because I have seen them for sale in the past, and perhaps I've bought one-I had a rotator hookah early on that was a real POS in my opinion. Can't remember if I gave it away or threw it away...but the parts that I had thought were brass when seeing it in the package ended up being plastic.... not cool.

[quote name='a cliche affair' date='02 February 2010 - 02:05 AM' timestamp='1265094351' post='449097'] [quote name='johnp' date='02 February 2010 - 12:03 AM' timestamp='1265090618' post='449085'] I'm fairly new on the forums (if not exactly new to hookah) but To add to the above, more heat=more smoke usually, (for me) but too much heat will burn your tobacco and also make it harsh. If you are using quick light coals, (you may already know this) try making sure they are completely lit and burning before putting them on the hookah as they will taint your tobacco with pyrotechnic taste. Bad. Incomplete burning can make more carbon monoxide, which can lead to headaches, nausea, and in extreme cases, death. carbon monoxide=bad. [b]perhaps more likely, Starbuzz is just a stronger tobacco than you are used to. I started on Nakhla double apple and Al Waha strawberry (what the street vendors had where I bought my first hookahs) so when I tried Starbuzz [i]I also got headaches and light headed[/i]. I believe it has a bit more nicotine than the Middle Eastern stuff.[/b] Which is why, no more than I smoke, I tend to steer clear of it for the most part now. Try keeping your coal near the edge and move it periodically, also, so you are breathing in more shisha and less direct charcoal. I'm rambling. Perhaps you can find something useful here. [/quote] False. If you get a bigger buzz from Starbuzz than you do from Nakhla something is wrong. Starbuzz is washed (less nicotine), Nakhla is not. (more nicotine) As others have stated, make sure the coal is fully lit before placing it on the bowl. Try cutting them in half and putting the halves on opposite sides of the bowl Also as stated, drink plenty of fluid before and during, eating before is also a good idea. [/quote] Interesting you would say this...because when I started smoking I only smoked Nakhla etc (see above) but starbuzz routinely had a heavier kick. Perhaps times are different now (I bought my last can of Starbuzz in 2004 I believe) but even considering the wash, Starbuzz (at least then) used Virginia (US) tobacco which has been bred specifically to be stronger for perhaps generations. Pretty sure Nakhla is made of weak Egyptian stuff. and I don't use partially lit coals ever. So that's not it. I still do not like Starbuzz, but if what you say is true perhaps I'll give them another try-perhaps its better than it was way back when. (pretty sure the shop owner said they were a brand new brand when I got it)

What is it with people in this thread(?) first of all, in Haiti, like so many other places, America is helping/doing the work/sticking its neck out. Just like in all those other places, the rest of the world, who are doing nothing, in many cases, feel content to sit and criticize us for how it is going. This bothers me. Secondly, Pat Robertson is a [i]televangelist[/i]-and makes his living preaching hellfire and brimstone-[i]not deciding what "conservatives" believe, or setting Republican or Libertarian party policies[/i]. Saying all conservatives etc. are represented by him and or agree with everything he says is ridiculous. That would be like saying all liberals follow in lock step with Jeremiah Wright. So the comparison is not only unfair but false. Third, if this isn't political...then why are a large percentage of the beginning of this thread [i]nothing to do with Haiti[/i] and helping them but a [i]hatred for Rush Limbaugh[/i] or what the poster feels Rush Limbaugh may have said? Next time, try listening and judge for yourself for awhile instead of what you may have heard someone else say. It might surprise you. Go ahead, when you're in your car. [i]No one will know[/i]. You'll find that all the bigotry, hatred, etc etc that you may [i]believe[/i] he says, based on things you might have heard....are simply not there. We've gone through two years of nonstop elections, and as Rush is a [i]conservative[/i] generally, he is attacked by [i]liberal[/i] leaning politicians and media types, without regard to his [i]actual[/i] program content. Otherwise if someone happened to hate you personally, and told all your friends that you were spouting all sorts of anti-semitic or racial or (fill in the blank) comments...wouldn't you [i]at least[/i] want them to [i]make up their[/i] [i]own minds[/i] about you instead of taking it from a guy [i]that hates you? [/i]Exactly. If you aren't a listener, you really [i]can't [/i]judge the man based on what another non-listener [i]imagines[/i] he says. [i]Haiti is poor. If we were to pay our debt (all of it) today, it's possible we would be poorer.[/i] What happened there is not some evil conservative plot, but a natural disaster. Comparisons to Katrina here are off the mark. Katrina victims were given not only warning, but aid-and the trucks were rolling before the hurricane even hit. Haiti-there WAS no warning. Areas that heeded the warnings before Katrina did well; other areas that [i]refused[/i] to listen to the warnings, did not evacuate, and paid for it. Imagine if Haiti had known the quake was going to hit days in advance and been offered aid....would they also have refused, in order to later blame the help for being slow? one wonders...much blame lays at the Governor (and the mayor of New Orleans) IMHO for turning down help when it was first offered. Embarrassed, they attempted to blame the Bush administration [i]for their failings[/i]-when oddly enough, they were offered the same things the other states that were hit got, but [i]turned it down[/i]. It is taking [i]LONGER[/i] by the Obama administration to get aid to Haiti [than the last administration to Katrina]-[i]not the other way around[/i], as some surmise-but oddly the same people who were screaming against the last administration supposedly dragging its feet, (it didn't)-are strangely noncritical of this one. This administration also decided that USAID should be put in charge of the help instead of the (already prepared for this scenario) military. USAID had been giving out aid for years, but they simply aren't prepared for that order of disaster or the logistical requirements that go with it. This decision was apparently made for basically political reasons. More lives could have been saved. Sure aid is [i]finally[/i] making it there, but it could have been there the same DAY, IMHO had the administration swallowed its distaste for the armed forces and for once let them run something they are REALLY good at. Logistics on an enormous scale. USAID is coming around, but.... It is time wasted IMHO that many probably didn't have. Now, there IS military aid there now-but the armed forces are not in control of the logistics and as a result the aid is being bottle necked. Perhaps I am wrong, but if Rush or others criticize the administration for this decision, then it is easy to see why. [size="2"][quote name='Bsw' date='19 January 2010 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1263941497' post='446459'] I am actually preparing to go to Haiti on Thursday. I am in the Air Force and primarily my job is a HH-60 Crew Chief. Our main mission is combat search and rescue, BUT we do respond to national disasters as well. And we will be sending some people(me included) down to Haiti shortly. I am sorry for them, although its going to be a rough TDY location to be at. Hopefully we can help, aid, and save as many as possible. [/quote] Good luck brother, hopefully people won't shoot at the rescue birds like people in Katrina did...I have friends who actually had to convince survivors to leave their (NHT) pipes to board the helicopters...fire me a PM sometime-I'm in a similar line of work and bet we've worked in some of the same places.[/size]

I'm fairly new on the forums (if not exactly new to hookah) but To add to the above, more heat=more smoke usually, (for me) but too much heat will burn your tobacco and also make it harsh. If you are using quick light coals, (you may already know this) try making sure they are completely lit and burning before putting them on the hookah as they will taint your tobacco with pyrotechnic taste. Bad. Incomplete burning can make more carbon monoxide, which can lead to headaches, nausea, and in extreme cases, death. carbon monoxide=bad. perhaps more likely, Starbuzz is just a stronger tobacco than you are used to. I started on Nakhla double apple and Al Waha strawberry (what the street vendors had where I bought my first hookahs) so when I tried Starbuzz [i]I also got headaches and light headed[/i]. I believe it has a bit more nicotine than the Middle Eastern stuff. Which is why, no more than I smoke, I tend to steer clear of it for the most part now. Try keeping your coal near the edge and move it periodically, also, so you are breathing in more shisha and less direct charcoal. I'm rambling. Perhaps you can find something useful here.

[quote name='K1024' date='01 February 2010 - 08:04 AM' timestamp='1265029498' post='448890'] wtf first off the leila is only $100, and h-s often does sales on it. I bought mine for $75 on xmas sale in 2008. it still works great, and has been in heavy use (at least heavy use for a hookah that i only use in my car). my leila has even survived being in a car accident at decently high speeds. also, it fit my cup holder easily and fit in a few of my friends cup holders fine too.[/quote] Glad you like your Leila...I honestly have no issues with it and as you say, I've not tried it. My main issue was why the difference in how it (or those who choose to smoke one) is treated vice the portable hookah (same as in the picture) that I possess. [quote name='K1024' date='01 February 2010 - 08:04 AM' timestamp='1265029498' post='448890'] what you do to your hookahs, but ive had a mya obelisk for 2+ years. its been to both sides of america and the only thing broken about it is the vase, which i didnt even need to leave my house to find a suitable vase for it (though i guess most people dont keep 2 liter earlimeir flasks around..)[/quote] Take a look at my gallery. I've neglected it so far, and there is only one picture there, but it should be a small hint of the places and/or conditions I sometimes travel with my hookahs. Road trips-well I don't honestly smoke and drive, although I do like in the back of my mind the ability to do so, if I wanted. Most of my (regular) hookahs were purchased from street vendors in Iraq with 3 exceptions; pretty sure most of them are Egyptian, but couldn't begin to tell you the maker-perhaps if I were to post pics someone would recognize an antiquated version of something they possess. [quote name='K1024' date='01 February 2010 - 08:04 AM' timestamp='1265029498' post='448890'] interesting that you tell others not to judge a hookah by its looks, and then you immediately say this hookah is better than the leila (which you dont appear to claim to have smoked). the plastic in the leila is a special heat resistant type, and it wont melt at temperatures which the hookah reaches, even if you are burning the shit out of it. [/quote] I'm not sure if this is better than the Leila or not (?) as you are correct, I've not tried one. If I've somewhere stated this one is better, then that was not my intent. I do believe they accomplish the same job, with my hookah being a bit more affordable...I just fail to see why one (odd-looking) hookah for travel should get poo pooed, (mine) and another not, perhaps in both instances by people who haven't actually tried one. I did consider a Leila at one point, but as you may ascertain from the picture, the ability to put in a cup holder is only part of the issue. I also feared it would be splintered or the bowl broken by a bad run in with a boot/ammunition can/weapon/other large heavy object thrown Oh-So-Gently into proximity with my pack, in the dark... I wonder if anyone has considered an electric, no-coal Leila(?) [quote name='Hobocans' date='01 February 2010 - 04:38 PM' timestamp='1265060295' post='448974'] Hey John, Yea, all of the hookah forums are very opinionated. You just have to take it in stride, no use getting heated about it, because you know what they say about arguing on the internet.[/quote]I admit it, I'm a sucker for an argument...it's a weakness. [quote name='Hobocans' date='01 February 2010 - 04:38 PM' timestamp='1265060295' post='448974']configuration is different, and I like different. There is something very special about the old school look of a traditional hookah, but I think there is a lot of innovation left in hookah smoking and I think anyone willing to come out with a product that rocks the boat, is at least doing something useful. Glad to hear the pipe works well. I love having the ability to smoke hookah anywhere I travel to, and if this is what works for you, do it. [/quote] Thanks for the kind words. Incidentally, when I originally bought this contraption I'd shopped for a hobohookah...but guess those things were sold out loooong before I was looking. I'd also tried the Witch, hoping for a suitable substitute...if you've tried one you know it is not. I now have a pristine HoboNargile that I plan to try for the first time on my trip to San Diego. The other was a Christmas gift and the guy prizes the thing...