Saint Obama, Part Two
Timothy Noah has this AP quote in his second Obama Messiah Watch:
Obama analyzed and integrated Einstein’s theory of relativity, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, as well as the concept of curved space as an alternative to gravity, for a [Harvard] Law Review article that [Prof. Laurence] Tribe wrote titled, “The Curvature of Constitutional Space.”
Of course, saints don’t smoke, and Obama’s about to make another effort to kick the habit:
After struggling to quit smoking in the past, Sen. Barack Obama is trying a cessation aid not available over the counter: public attention.Obama (D-Ill.) resolved to quit his cigarette habit over the winter holidays, just weeks before his expected presidential campaign would make photographers and reporters an even more regular part of his life.
He said in a Monday interview that, although he has never been a heavy smoker, he has quit for periods over the last several years but then slipped back into the habit. On the cusp of a potential presidential bid seemed the right time to quit for good, he said.
“I’ve never been a heavy smoker,” Obama said. “I’ve quit periodically over the last several years. I’ve got an ironclad demand from my wife that in the stresses of the campaign I don’t succumb. I’ve been chewing Nicorette strenuously.”
The incentive to quit is great for any office seeker, as increasingly negative attitudes about smoking translate into political pressure not to do it–or at least not to be caught doing it. At a time when most willing public figures also are expected to serve as role models, those with unhealthy habits face intense pressure to leave them behind.
As someone who was a heavy smoker, and successfully quit two and a half years ago, I fully support and sympathize with Obama in his quest. However, one small gripe – you didn’t quit several times, Senator (W.C. Fields, anyone?). When one quits, it’s for good, and it need only be done once…
Wasn’t it Mark Twain that said, “Quitting smoking is easy, I’ve done it a thousand times.”?
As a light smoker that thinks and talks about quitting but hasn’t I can only wish him all the best – however poorly he may construct his rhetoric on the subject.
Agreed….
However, I always take a deep reservation regarding folks who don’t drink…..
Any man who eschews a dram of whiskey will never get my vote.
Respects,
You sound like my man Frank Sinatra…however, what about Bush? Does he get a pass, since he USED to drink so much?…
Mark,
Bush, and anyone else who believes they have a problem with drinking, and honestly seeks help, always gets a pass.
I have nothing but scorn, however, for those suddenly “discover” they have a substance abuse problem, and use it as a dodge to escape public scrutiny, while letting things “calm down”.
Admitting a real problem and dealing with it is admirable, and what one should expect from an adult. It means, at least, that they are listening.
However, I find as I grow older that my greatest impediment to drinking in the style I would accustom myself to seems to be my current financial state. There is a world of difference between “Old Mr. Boston Whiskey” and, say, Knob Creek.
Priorities, priorities….. sigh ….
And Frank and the rest of the Rat Pack were all class……
Respects,
The issue as to whether or not Barack Obama would be qualified, or electable to serve as President because he smokes cigarettes, I assume was raised because of health concerns. The ones more notably that come to mind are lung conditions such as lung cancer, emphysema, etc, etc. Obviously, we’ve been inundated as of late by reports from the media and health care industry specifically noting that these conditions are a result of smoking, so it’s completely understandable how people might refer to that as a basis for their concern.
However with regards to this issue, there’s a dirty little secret you might be interested in knowing about, that the healthcare industry has conveniently forgotten to mention over the years. In addition, it’s quite apparent they have no desire to come forward and divulge this to the public any time soon, much less make an effort to correct/dispel any inaccuracies or rumors associated with the issue either. Yes, it appears they’re quite content the way things are – no matter how many people may be affected by their silence, or omissions. But with reference to the healthcare industry, there can never be any good that will ever come out of dishonesty, or blatant omission, so I feel strongly the public has a right to know, and absolutely deserves to know exactly what our “medical professionals” (or shall I say, the medical mafia) has been deliberately keeping from us. Having said that, what I’m about to tell you is really just the tip of the iceberg as far as what they’ve truly been able to distort, and keep under wrap. And keep in mind, if they can get away with misleading the public about one thing, is it not logical to assume they might very well be doing the same thing in other areas of concern as well? – Say, for example heart disease, obesity, etc., etc? Just remember, if there’s a profit to be made in some way, often times that far outweighs the desire to be forthright. Case in point … our state health departments literally make millions of $ each year off the backs of smokers (through higher taxes, etc), so is it any wonder they would ever want to upset the gold-filled apple cart, and do anything that could possibly jeopardize that income? Well, I think it’s about time the truth comes out, and our so-called medical professionals are held accountable for the chaos they’ve enjoyed inflicting on the public – all in the name of good health.
What this is about is called: Alpha-1 Antitrypsin – commonly referred to by doctors as Alpha-1. What it is basically, is a genetic deficiency linked to all kinds of lung problems – including lung cancer, emphysema, asthma, etc, etc, R-E-G-A-R-D-L-E-S-S whether a person smokes cigarettes or not, whether they’ve ever smoked in their life, or have ever even been around cigarette smoke – period. In other words, if for example there were no such thing as cigarettes, people would still get lung cancer, emphysema, etc, etc., simply because some of us are already genetically predisposed for having lung problems. A simple blood test in a doctor’s office can determine whether or not you have the deficiency; but unfortunately, chances are, doctors are not going to willingly offer that test to you. But this is why there are some people who get lung cancer who have never smoked a day in their life, and this is also why other people might smoke 50 years, and never have lung problems. Again, it doesn’t matter how much they try, and try, to put blame for this on a person’s lifestyle … The fact is, there IS a genetic link to these lung conditions. But again, the medical community would prefer we not know about this, because otherwise, that would interfere with their true agenda – which is to put as much blame as possible on individuals for the medical conditions they may have. It’s really a shame we’ve allowed them so much power that they’ve been able to get away with this; but from their perspective, it’s better for them, and of course easier too, just to concentrate on blaming the people themselves for certain conditions/illnesses, and they can just wash their hands of it. That way, they don’t have to worry about wasting valuable time studying genetics at all anymore if they don’t want to, and they certainly wouldn’t have to worry about being hounded to get a cure/treatment for something if they could just put the blame for that condition on the people themselves anyway. And of course, need I be remindful as to what happens when there is a cure for something, … for example, polio? The Doctors are the ones who end up with less $$ in their pockets.